Menie: The Case For A Public Inquiry – Part 1

 Aberdeenshire, Featured, News  12 Responses »
Aug 092013
 
suzannemeniefeat

By Suzanne Kelly.

In the wake of the Trump Organisation’s activities at the Menie Estate and its interactions with government, the impartiality of some of our public servants and representatives has been called into question.

Over 19,000 people have signed local resident David Milne’s petition requesting a public inquiry, which will be decided by The Scottish Government’s Petitions Committee.

Such an inquiry would put local and national government, Police Scotland and Scottish Enterprise and more under the microscope, and they don’t want that.

Despite the protestations of these organisations, the requested inquiry is not only about uncovering past activities, it is also about what is going on in the present, and making changes for the future.

Following Milne’s appearance, the Petitions Committee requested comment from SNH, Marine Scotland, Aberdeenshire Council, Police Scotland and Scottish Enterprise Grampian. With concerns still emerging across all these bodies regarding past and present incidents, the case for an independent inquiry seems clear.

In a two-part story, here are the bodies’ arguments as to why the inquiry isn’t needed, and the reasons why there must be a public, independent inquiry.

Background

Menie Resident David Milne created an online petition calling for a public inquiry into present as well as past public sector activities at the Menie Estate. The estate, once an unspoilt, sparsely-populated area on the North East coast of Scotland is to be transformed into two golf courses, a hotel and hundreds of homes, compromising two Sites of Specific Scientific Interest in the process.

Milne’s petition, signed by over 19,000 people was heard by the Petitions Committee at Holyrood.

David Milne’s petition, which can be found here, http://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/search?q=david+milne states:-

“We are calling on the Scottish Parliament, through the Public Petitions Committee, to urge the Scottish Government to hold a public inquiry into the way local government, Scottish Ministers and other relevant public bodies conducted themselves throughout their dealings with the Trump Organisation in relation to the Menie”

From the responses coming in from our government’s agencies, you could be forgiven for thinking the call was simply for a review of past activities. Generally speaking, almost all of the statements made to the press, and the official responses to the committee to date, claim that the agencies do not want this inquiry.

Those in the firing line are taking the position that the issues are in the past, and this was ‘the most scrutinised planning application’ in Scottish history.  Sarah Malone, VP at Trump Golf Links International Scotland told STV:-

“This has been the most scrutinised golf development in history. The project has already gone through a public inquiry and a very lengthy planning process.

“Mr Milne needs to move on. The championship course is now established and drawing thousands of golfers from around the world to the North-east of Scotland, as well as creating business opportunities and much needed jobs.”
http://news.stv.tv/north/222949-david-milne-will-appear-in-front-of-holyroods-petitions-committee-in-may/

Malone’s comments about the project have nothing to do with the full scope of the requested investigation. Indeed, the very act of calling the application in by a government which wined and dined Trump both sides of the Atlantic should perhaps itself be investigated.

There is little doubt Malone, married to Damian Bates of the overwhelmingly pro-Trump Press & Journal, wishes Milne and the rest of the residents would ‘move on’.

At one point a Trump operative pretended to be a private home buyer, and approached the residents, wanting to buy their homes on the false pretence that he and his wife ‘fell in love with the area.’

As for Malone’s claims that thousands are playing the course, this may be true, but it is far from booked to capacity according to the online booking form. Have the thousands of jobs materialised? Has the local economy received great economic benefits? Perhaps the investigation should include those questions in its scope as well.

Its minutes reveal communication issues, lack of site visits and lack of Trump employee attendance

The argument by those seeking to avoid an inquiry because of past scrutiny does not bear analysis. The planning application’s past history is assuredly of interest; there are still details emerging as to how individuals and institutions acted. However, there are many issues which were never explored, and some that were brushed aside.

There was no meaningful scrutiny of what went on behind the scenes before, during and after the planning permission was granted. There was never any scrutiny of the roles played by local and central government, Police Scotland, Scottish Enterprise or environmental groups meant to safeguard the area, including the dysfunctional, disappeared MEMAG, an environmental entity set up to watch over the estate.

Its minutes reveal communication issues, lack of site visits and lack of Trump employee attendance at meetings. Crucially, there are ongoing problems, and a public, independent inquiry would hopefully examine these in detail. This is what Milne is calling for.

As David Mine indicated:-

“This isn’t about me or anybody else against Trump, but an effort to try and ensure that those who were responsible for making numerous mistakes and breaches of the rules are held to account, and an attempt to prevent anything similar happening again in the future.”
http://local.stv.tv/aberdeen/news/196354-trump-opponent-pressing-for-fresh-inquiry-into-golf-course-handling/

On May 14 2013 the Petitions Committee heard Milne and asked questions about his request. They then called for the public bodies involved to respond. Predictably, the responses indicate that the bodies do not want an inquiry.  Surely, if everything was handled correctly, an inquiry should be welcomed by all sides to clear the air?

It is currently only Police Scotland that seems to admit any failings at all; at the time of writing, their submission to the committee is not available. As to the other organisations and quangos involved, to paraphrase Mandy Rice-Davies, commenting at the height of another high-level scandal ‘Well, they would say that, wouldn’t they?’. 

Here are details of the Scottish Enterprise and Aberdeenshire Council submissions, with relevant reasons why they inquiry is needed despite their protestations.

Scottish Enterprise

Submission to the Committee by Scottish Enterprise Chief Executive, Dr Lena Wilson.
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_PublicPetitionsCommittee/.pdf

SE Comments on Scrutiny:

“Over recent years, our engagement with the Trump Organisation has been the subject of numerous FoI requests and as such this information is in the public domain. At all times we have endeavoured to provide a full and comprehensive account of all staff engagement and SE’s relationship and role with regard to the Menie Estate development.”

Highlights from the body of the letter:-

“In 2005/6 SE Grampian conducted a Feasibility Study of the Menie House Estate to assess the economic viability of a 5-star hotel and golf resort …also commissioned a promotional DVD to showcase the project to the international market and to promote and increase the profile of Grampian as an attractive inward investment location.  ..The Trump Organisation contacted the Menie Estate directly, with no involvement from SE… the Feasibility Study has been made public under FoI…  “

“Through our international arm, Scottish Development International we were alerted by a third party that the Trump Organisation was looking for locations in Scotland and Ireland for a prospective golf development. When we met with representatives of the Trump Organisation, the Menie Estate had already been identified by the organisation as a possible site.

“SE Grampian was supportive of the proposals for a golf development at the Menie Estate, given the economic impact it would have on the region.  SE Grampian (and subsequently SE) did not offer or commit funds in support of the proposed Trump development in Aberdeen.  In 2007, our former Chief Executive wrote to the Trump Organisation on the matter of the planning application decision.”

Comments

This response does little to explain the role Scottish Enterprise had in the successful planning application. It might refer to the contents of the 2007 letter Perry sent Trump, but the contents and implications should surely be subject to a public inquiry.

You could be forgiven for thinking that the determination of an unelected quango, whose head accompanied the First Minister to dinner with Trump, outweighed the legal status of SSSI land, and the wishes of Scottish Natural Heritage, the views of which never seem to have been sought when SE decided to market the Menie Estate.

Aberdeen Voice obtained the 2007 letter some months ago from a FoI request.

There are indications too that correspondence from SE to Trump, Aberdeenshire Council (and possibly other entities), which simply must have existed have been lost, discarded or not disclosed. More details to follow, and will appear in a separate forthcoming article.

letter also provides among other things a nice list of Perry’s pro-Trump lobbying efforts

For instance, SE claim that no correspondence took place between 2008 and the present between it and Trump.

Magically, a ringing endorsement for the club by Jack Perry, SE, appears on the club’s website – a site that did not exist until after the planning go-ahead was granted, and after the December 2007 letter they mention.

It seems too that correspondence from Perry on the subject of Trump cannot be found, perhaps an inquiry can get SE to explain how so much happened with so little correspondence, or whether correspondence was definitely deleted – and if so why. Additionally, since Perry tells of writing to the head of Aberdeenshire Council ‘expressing dismay’, there should then be a letter to this effect somewhere.

The SE logo and Craw appear in a pro-Trump video shown at a public meeting, apparently taken from STV. SE, supporting Trump, had no problem in letting this go without complaint.  No doubt therefore that anyone is at liberty to use the SE logo, which of course implies SE endorsement, with impunity.

This December 2007 Perry letter also provides among other things a nice list of Perry’s pro-Trump lobbying efforts, all of course made possible by the public purse.

Here are excerpts from the 7th December 2007 letter Perry wrote to Trump:-

“You may or may not recall that I had the pleasure in October 2006 of joining you for lunch in the Trump Tower with the then First Minister, Mr Jack McConnell.  …We at Scottish Enterprise certainly shared your excitement over this project. As the project developed we believed and still do that the economic benefits to Scotland of this project were substantial.

“Accordingly, we were profoundly dismayed by the decision made by the Aberdeenshire Council Infrastructure Committee to reject the planning application for this project. I recorded that disappointment in a personal letter to Ms Anne Robertson, Leader of Aberdeenshire Council. As you know, since then the Scottish Government has decided to ‘call in’ the application. Rightly and properly, Scottish Government Minister’s [sic] will not now comment on the application but I regard their action as encouraging. We concur with the Scottish Government’s contention that this is genuinely a project of national importance to Scotland.

“I have taken the liberty of discussing the matter with the Chairman of the Scottish Parliament’s Enterprise, Energy and Tourism Committee to make him aware of our support for the project and to offer any evidence to him and his committee should they require [sic].

“While this Committee has no role in the approval process of your application, it is possible they may consider the repercussions of Aberdeenshire Council’s decision on Scotland’s tourism industry. I have also now spoken about this matter to the Shadow Enterprise Ministers from the Labour and Liberal Democrat parties in the Scottish Parliament. I have tried to make it clear in these discussions that the impact of Aberdeenshire Council’s decision goes far beyond the immediate issue of the Trump development but has much wider implications for Scotland’s international image and reputation as a country which welcomes investment.

“I have been greatly encouraged by the unequivocal support from the Scottish business community which your project was [sic] attracted. I remain hopeful that Scottish Government Ministers will address this matter with speed. We shall continue to provide whatever evidence and support we can, should we be called to do so.

“For your information, I have also been greatly encouraged over the past few days by the support shown by the Aberdeen City and Shire Economic Forum [ACSEF] whose chairman, Mr Patrick Machray, has been very public and very vocal in support of the Trump development. Patrick is also the Chairman of Scottish Enterprise Grampian. As Scotland’s principal economic development agency, we at Scottish Enterprise wish to see your development proceed. We will continue to do what we can to help.  “

CC (redacted), Lorna Jack, Patrick Machray

One of the glaring issues is the reference to Scottish Government’s predisposition to go ahead with this project, prior to the government reporters making their report. If the head of the government you worked for wanted a particular result, and if that knowledge was well known, viz public dinners and meetings with the applicant, lobbying letters from SE, etc., would you possibly be pre-disposed to doing what your employer wanted?

An inquiry should look at the lobbying admitted to and what repercussions this had in terms of creating pressure to press ahead with the Trump plans.

Quango watchers will not be surprised by the overlap between ACSEF and SE; both unelected, both lobbying for their own causes with public money.

despite the expert opinion of Sarah Malone, these issues were not examined fully

Both quangos seem convinced by the economic arguments; perhaps the robustness or otherwise of the economic case for the course made at the time should be re-examined in public.  Perry may have been dismayed by the Shire’s initial rejection; those who are interested in democracy may well be dismayed by Perry’s lobbying, dining habits and spending.

Was it proper for Jack Perry to send Trump such a letter in the first place? Should unelected, publicly funded quangos pressure local or central government and shadow ministers? Should SE as a quango have sought environmental guidance from Scottish Natural Heritage before committing public money, some £35000, on a DVD and one thousand copies extolling the virtues of building a complex on two SSSIs?

Perhaps a public inquiry should be asking these questions, for despite the expert opinion of Sarah Malone, these issues were not examined fully, and have definite implications for the future.

For further details of the ongoing FOI request and the questions and anomalies involved, see   https://aberdeenvoice.com/2013/06/scottish-enterprise-trump-and-menie-business-as-usual/

Another article is in preparation concerning recently released Scottish Enterprise correspondence.

Aberdeenshire Council

Submission to the Committee by Shire Council Chief Executive, Colin MacKenzie.
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_PublicPetitionsCommittee/Aberdeenshire_Council

Comments on Scrutiny:-

“I would suggest that any such matters arising prior to and surrounding the call-in by the Scottish Government in December 2007 have already been exhaustively considered and debated. ……I strongly believe that no further scrutiny is required of events leading up to and including the call-in by the Scottish Government and I can find no substance in any of the allegations made against Aberdeenshire Council during the subsequent period with reference to either elected members’ conduct or due planning process.”

Summary of letter contents:-

“[begins by mentioning many historic inquiries, omitting the quantity of information since released and the number of issues subsequently arising]…I would also require far greater detail in order to respond to any such inferences made [in the film You’ve Been Trumped and/or at the committee hearing]  in relation to the conduct of Aberdeenshire Council elected members. What I would say is that both officers and elected members of the council take very seriously any allegation that the rules detailed in The Councillors’ Code of Conduct have not been followed, being fully aware of their importance particularly when elected members are exercising a quasi-judicial role in regulatory matters… It is and has been Aberdeenshire Council’s position that procedurally elected members are not provided with the detail of the planning obligation and financial contributions in order that there is clear autonomy in the process. I would add that as part of a wider council review of developers’ obligations, the position is currently being considered here.

“It is misleading to say that all bar the original application at the Menie Estate have been retrospective. I can further confirm that with reference to the applications for full planning permission for further development at the Menie Estate, due planning process was and is being properly followed by the council in accordance with the relevant statutory guidance and legislation. … Also, where the council becomes aware of any breach of planning regulation which requires investigation, proper investigation is carried out with any appropriate follow up action taken. It is not the case that council officers are on site every week but only as required with reference to any statutory regulation whether in terms of planning or otherwise.

“… Unauthorised planning developments were not allowed to continue unabated at the Menie Estate nor was an unusual or different process adopted with reference to planning developments there. In 2012 there were 175 retrospective applications dealt with by the council. This represents only 4% of all applications submitted and of the 175, only 5 (less than 3%) related to the Menie Estate. The requirement to make retrospective planning applications is a common and consistent approach taken by the council to remedy breaches of planning control.

“With regard to some of the other points made during the hearing, I would explain that the clock at the entrance does have planning permission and there are a number of planning applications where the work is in accordance with the approved plans. The large marquee referred to was properly erected under the permitted development rights which allow for such structures to be in place for 28 days. The temporary clubhouse is in fact located as per the approved plans. It may be the case that reference is to its position indicated in the outline planning permission but that was only indicative which is perfectly competent. I can confirm that Aberdeenshire Council did previously investigate the use of the former Leyton Farm buildings and concluded that no unauthorised change of use of the buildings had occurred and that their use had been incorporated into planning permissions that had been approved. The council’s planning service is currently seeking a retrospective application for an area of bund adjacent to Leyton Cottage. Although the car park and lighting were not constructed in accordance with the original approved plans, a retrospective application has now been granted for the works as they have been carried out.

“There have been a number of complaints regarding outdoor access restrictions at the Menie Estate, only some of which are valid in terms of preventing access rights under statute. Our officers have met with a representative from the estate on a number of occasions and were working with the estate looking into various solutions which would resolve users’ access issues whilst taking on the concerns of the landowner/estate in relation to potential security risks and vehicle access. Menie Estate has recently instructed agents to act in this matter and the intention going forward is to correspond direct with them.”

Comments on Aberdeenshire submission.

It is hard to know where to start; the letter paints a picture of a correctly-behaving council and misguided residents and observers.

It is possible to take exception to almost every idea it puts forth, but rebutting a few of its claims and attempts at explanation should suffice in making the case for Aberdeenshire being a Council where there are leadership, accountability, procedural and communication issues, to say the least.

With regard to the use of figures to try and trivialise the number of retrospective planning permission applications needed at Menie, this is at best disingenuous. We could likewise make statistical analysis of the applications over the size of the shire, and see how many are localised at Menie.

We could ask how many of the total retrospective planning applications made were for areas with stringent conditions laid down by central government. We could ask how many of these retrospective applications were for properties with their own dedicated Environmental Clerk of Works.

We could also ask for an explanation of how the weekly visits to the site to ensure planning permission was adhered to are now being denied. In August of 2011 Aberdeenshire’s spokesperson wrote to me:-

“This development is well-scrutinised and the approved plans are being adhered to.

“Site inspections are undertaken on a weekly basis by various organisations to ensure that the development is being carried out according to the planning permission granted.”

This does seem just a little at odds with the newly-stated position that MacKenzie takes.

I can see why Dr Lena Wilson gets to speak for Scottish Enterprise; it is not an elected body.  Were the elected members of Aberdeenshire Council consulted as to the contents of MacKenzie’s submission, and should they have been?

MacKenzie’s letter puts a good deal of emphasis on the councillors and their conduct.

He is well aware that Councillor Gillian Owen was an outspoken supporter of Trump; her own newsletter (now taken down alas) had a photo of her with Trump, apparently taken at a visit to the course. Perhaps she accepted not so much as a cup of coffee; for nothing appeared on her register of interests. Again, this is somewhat at odds with MacKenzie’s sanctimonious offering.

It is also at odds with MacKenzie’s attempt to give Councillor Martin Ford a dressing-down for the crime of being a councillor giving the BBC an interview at council premises.  In terms of following procedure and precedent, it should be noted the council stood at all times by Dr Christine Gore.

The main focus of any inquiry should be Aberdeenshire planning.

The conduct of Dr Christine Gore has not been looked at critically by the government as yet. She famously sought advice from the Trump team, and wanted to know how to manage the public over the impending approval. When in 2009 Gore was to be the subject of investigation by her professional organisation, the Royal Institute of Town Planners, over potential collusion with Trump, the Shire defended her.

The Shire, aware of communication between Trump’s lawyers and Gore, issued a statement reading in part:

“It is very easy to throw around accusations in such a highly publicised case where misinformation by a number of parties always grabs the news headlines.”

As Rob Edwards wrote:-

“Trump’s lawyer, Ann Faulds, drafted a four-page report in Gore’s name justifying the evictions for submission to councillors, though it was never used. An email from Gore to Faulds in April requested at least a week’s notice of Trump’s application to help manage media interest.

“Thereafter ‘close liaison’ would be required, Gore wrote, ‘in order that we can have a managed approach to what is inevitably going to be a difficult and emotive reaction given that this new application will involve land outwith the applicant’s ownership.’

Marshall alleged that Gore ‘appears to have colluded with the developer’s solicitor’, and argued that her use of the word ‘emotive’ was pejorative. Her behaviour was in breach of the RTPI code of conduct requiring planners to act with integrity and to exercise ‘independent professional judgement’, he claimed.”
http://www.robedwards.com/2009/11/probe-into-top-planners-collusion-with-trump.html

Gore has since been promoted and earns £109,827 per annum from the Shire.

The environmental clerk of works did quite some job; despite the many conditions put on building in this previously-protected area, a giant bund of earth now separates the Munro household from its former views of the water, blocks their light and has caused actual property damage as the sand and dirt blows off it into their yard, garden, cars and home.

This has never been looked at, nor indeed has the last-minute change in a retrospective application concerning this bund.

How precisely this giant mound of earth was allowed in the first place should perhaps itself be worthy of an investigation; to ignore this kind of planning debacle on such an unprecedented development will do nothing for the current residents, and ignoring the issue bodes very  badly for future developments.

The status of this giant mound of earth changes within the planning department documentation so often that it seems to be moving from an unplanned structure of considerable height causing damage to a mere blip worthy of retrospective approval. Still, Mackenzie tells the Petitions Committee that all is fine in terms of retrospective planning permission.

Outdoor access is still in contention, despite claims to the contrary, and other issues with how the Shire’s officers handled the development past, present and future are worthy of perhaps their own separate investigation.

Perhaps if MacKenzie spent as much time worrying about the planning department, the environmental clerk of works, Gore’s interaction with Trump, and so on as he does about Ford speaking to the BBC, an inquiry wouldn’t be required. As things stand, whatever he might write – clearly in inquiry is needed.

Part 2 of this series will look at further submissions to the Petitions Committee, and will supply questions that should be asked at an inquiry. If any Aberdeen Voice readers would care to submit questions for consideration for this list, please get in touch. 

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

The Donald v The Sweeney

 Aberdeenshire, Creative Writing, Opinion  No Responses »
Jul 122013
 

By Bob Smith.

trumpleaving

The Donald wis on Panorama
Spikkin tae BBC’s John Sweeney
Aboot aa the gyaans  on
At his placie ower at Menie
.
The Sweeney hints tae Mr Trump
6000 jobs hinna cum tae fruition
The Trumpie lot war fair pit oot
An treated aa iss wi derision
.
Donald roared – Git rid o aat hoose
Tae the “P&J” editor’s wife
Says she it micht cause a stir
An reap ye lots o strife
.
Faa cares the mannie gabbit
A sure can dee fit a wint
It’s on ma lan quoth Donald
Tae the puir dementit bint
.
The hoose belangs tae David Milne
A chiel Trump disna much like
Bit David stuck twa fingers up
An said Trumpie tak a hike		 A billie fae the Royal Toon Plannin
Thocht Trumpie’s case it wis unique
In aa his ‘ears in the plannin game
He’d seen nithing tae cause sic pique
.
Oor First Minister an The Donald
War eence on spikkin terms
They’ve hid a bit o a faa oot
Ower the plans aboot winfairms
.
Trump wis qizzed aboot his dealins
Wi a mannie fae the Mafia mob
Syne he up’s an leaves the interview
Hintin The Sweeney didna ken his job
.
Noo in the pages o “P&J” we read
Business pallies tae his rescue hiv rode
Eence mair tryin tae kid us aa
In the Nor’east the mannie is loed.
.
Birds o a feather flock tigither
A mynd aboot iss  auld sayin
Bit maist o us chiels ken they’re aa feels
Faa dunce tae the tune Trumpie’s playin

Bob Smith “The Poetry Mannie” 2013
Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

Old Susannah’s Journal No. 119 – Nudge, Nudge

 Opinion, Satire and Humour  3 Responses »
May 022013
 

Voice’s Old Susannah takes a look over the past week’s events in the ‘Deen and beyond. By Suzanne Kelly.

dictionary
Tally Ho!  This past week there was an astonishingly great fashion show by Gray’s School of Art second and third year fashion students, held in The Seven Incorporated Trades of Aberdeen.
It was professionally organised, smoothly and elegantly run (with a great reception), and the work on show was by any standard advanced beyond the expected level.  More on that elsewhere in Aberdeen Voice.

Let’s take a bit of a break from Mr Trump this week I think.  Besides which, he’s about to issue writs to the Scottish Government and I’m really scared!  If Donald doesn’t want windfarms, Donald will take us to court!

When a law abiding man like that takes legal action, you know he’s not doing it frivolously.  I’m sure he’s got a point:  hardly anyone’s signing up for golf at Balmedie, and it’s almost as if the 6,000 jobs that were created might be in peril. 

This lack of golfers could be due to the sandstorms, hailstorms, rain and cold weather, but far more likely people are staying away in case they’d have to see a wind farm offshore.  If I’m going to spend £195 for a round of golf, then have a £100 lunch for two consisting of a few burgers, fries and coffees, I don’t want to be looking at windfarms, either.  For that kind of money, I want Led Zeppelin performing live.

I hear the Mayday march might be cancelled this year.  Since all of the labour force is now doing so very well under the Coalition Government, the unions decided there is no need for any display.  Things are almost as great as when the entire town marched against Kate Dean.

There is also to be a party and events in Union Terrace Gardens that afternoon, but since it is so full of criminals and drug smugglers, I’m sure we’ll all be too afraid to go there.  If only we could have had the granite web.

The beautiful granite-clad concrete web may be toast now, but then again, we look set to get some very fetching, brand new glass-box office buildings soon.  Really, how do these trendy architects come up with these great designs?

These happening, nearly modern buildings will replace St Nicholas’ House.  The complex will blend right into the local architecture of Marischal College and won’t stick out like a dated pastiche predictable cheap sore thumb whatsoever.  No doubt these glass box office buildings will look absolutely state-of-the art near the Milne Triple Kirks glass box office buildings and won’t seem old dated and dirty in 3 years or less.

Given the seagull and pigeon populations, this may be a good time to open a window cleaning business.

Norwich decided to encourage some peregrines to nest in their city centre

Speaking of Triple Kirks, poor Stewart certainly has had his difficulties lately.  He may have failed to get Scottish football teams to vote with him despite his use of reasoned debate, but at least he showed the city centre wildlife he was boss.

You may remember how Stewart Milne, saviour of Scottish Football and tasteful developer arranged to have the long-settled peregrine falcons ‘discouraged’ from nesting in the Triple Kirks site when he took it over.  Well done Stewart.

Unlike clever, business-orientated Aberdeen, Norwich decided to encourage some peregrines to nest in their city centre.  The people of Norwich surprisingly find their rare peregrines and the newly-hatched chicks a source of interest, tourism, pride and education as they and the wider world watch the birds on cctv.  More info here:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-22368516 .

The RSBP believes there are fewer than 1400 breeding pairs in the UK.  With as many as that around, it is no wonder the previous Aberdeen City Council administration didn’t discourage Milne from discouraging the birds.  We need more office buildings you see.

As there is clearly not enough building work going on to placate important local contractors, some still cling to the possibility of turning Union Terrace Gardens into a parking lot/shopping mall, which we so desperately need.  What other explanation is there for the continued existence of the limited company which is the Aberdeen City Gardens Trust?

They’re still listed as an active company at Companies House, with directors Tom Smith, Lavinia Massie and of course Colin Crosby.  (I wonder how they managed to get so much positive Granite Web coverage in Chamber of Commerce publications?  Perhaps as a board member, Colin could help field the answer to this mystery.)  Then again, Colin is also on the Aberdeen Harbour Board, which now seeks to expand into the remaining coastal greenbelt.

An ambitious man, Colin; he’ll make us all rich yet.  Well, some of us rich anyway.

Between the ACGT, ACSEF, the Harbour Board, the Chamber of Commerce, Brewin Dolphin, and the board of Robert Gordon’s College, it’s a wonder Crosby hasn’t dropped any balls.

 we are all so weak-willed we’ll do whatever is made easy for us to do

For some reason I’m reminded of an episode of Dr Who in which invading aliens try to build monstrosities all over any green space they could all in the name of profit, although I can’t think why that should spring to mind just now.

Yes, it’s men like Colin who disprove the otherwise sound, logical government experiment in Nudge Theory.  I’m sure we all know what this important Nudge Theory is, but I’ll get onto it with a definition or two anyway.

Nudge Theory: (modern English jargon phrase) Behavioural theory that people are inherently lazy and need to be pushed into doing what is best for them.

The Nanny State lives on, and thank goodness for that.

It’s like this:  only the Colin Crosbys, Stewart Milnes and other rich businessmen aren’t lazy – the rest of us are.  Worse, we are all so weak-willed we’ll do whatever is made easy for us to do.  This highly-scientific theory is now a government triumph!  Result!  Not only is it part of the reason the country’s doing so well, but it’s also going to  be launched as an initiative!

And you thought there was no good news around.

The BBC covers this marvellous development, and supplies examples of what might otherwise sound like idiotic psychobabble.  For instance, if manufacturers put a label on a bottle of wine to the effect that the average person drinks one glass of wine a day, we’ll all follow suit and do just that.

School children will start eating healthier at lunchtimes too.  Why?  Because we’re going to put the tastier junk food items in locations that are more difficult to reach than healthier options.  This logic is brilliant!  You can see examples of how this works in the shops today.  Since lad’s mags, fags and booze are kept out of reach no one buys them because they’re too lazy to do so.

It’s clear this Nudge Theory is going to take off; it’s so easy to understand.

This scheme is going to make the government millions as well as make all of us safer and less stressed by having to think for ourselves.  I personally look forward to having my laziness used to steer me into good behaviour in this subtle manner.  It’s not at all Kafkaesque or Orwellian for the government to spend our time and our money on getting us to fall into line and be good.

But the really good news is that this will be a ….

Partnership Model: (modern English jargon) A business entity or company formed by government and private enterprise.

Well, since forming in 2010 the brains behind this great Nudge Theory scheme have really come together to ambitiously turn this scientific theory into a money-spinner.  Old Susannah has to wonder if people are inherently lazy, then what sets the people behind this Nudge Theory Partnership Model and their work to go into business with their scheme apart from the rest of us lazy, weak-willed populace.

I guess that they’re just smarter, better, brighter than we are.  Only to the worst kind of lazy cynic would this great humanitarian scheme look like a brazen wheeze and ploy to earn money for old and unnecessary rope.

Here’s what the BBC, lazy as they are, were able to find out:-

“It could become the first of “dozens” of elements of Whitehall to be spun out, as Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude plans to shake-up the Civil Service.

“A spokesman for Mr Maude said: ‘We are in a global race for the jobs and opportunities of the future. To get Britain back on the rise we must find innovative ways to deliver better services more efficiently’. [Old Susannah wonders if Mr Maude was too lazy to make his own statement to the press, and had to be ‘nudged’ into releasing a statement by this spokesman]

“’It’s great news that the world-renowned ‘nudge’ unit is spinning out from central government. As a mutual they will combine the benefits of private sector experience and investment with the innovation and commitment from staff leadership.  This accelerates our drive to make public assets pay their way. We hope to support dozens more new spin outs over the next few years. This is a whole new growth area and Britain is leading the way.”

Well, I’m impressed.  We’re going to make money out of exploiting people’s natural fecklessness.

The government will join with a private company (no doubt one completely unrelated to any government ministers, tax avoiders or big business interests or lobbyists.  Then, they’ll sell the scheme back to the government, which will demand government offices buy into it.

Lazy?  I guess you could say fecklessness is off and running as a way to make profits.  Or something like that.

Group Four changed to G4S, and did a splendid job running the Olympics

I wonder what this great wheeze will wind up earning for the taxpayer over the years?  Undoubtedly we’ll all be better off.  Otherwise, they’ll just tell us we’ll be better off, and we’ll be too lazy and/or too stupefied by our one glass of wine a day to bother to find out the real story.

If I could only motivate myself to do some work, or even to open another BrewDog.

Ages ago the Government started privatising everything, and look how well that’s turned out.  For instance, Group Four security started running various prison services.  These went so well, Group Four changed to G4S, and did a splendid job running the Olympics without any problems at all.  Could the government complain if things went wrong?

Not really – the contracts were sewn up very well, government and private sector overlaps tended to help each other out or at least look the other way if problems arose, and lobbyists were always on hand with sweeteners to keep the cogs well oiled.  And so it will be with the private/public money-spinning Partnership Model, which will industriously make money out of the fact we the people are lazy.

Nudge Nudge wink wink indeed.

With the Mayday march about to take place, I think we should extend an invitation to the brave, pioneering, hard-working men and women behind Nudge Theory and the Partnership Model to come and join in.  I have no doubt that if our teachers, carers, volunteers, firemen, etc. could meet the Nudge professionals, they’d understand just what real hard work is.

I was going to write about the latest in relation to the standoff between the press and the government over press regulation.  I was going to write something about Trump, windfarms, and golf, but I realise that I’m just too lazy to do so.

So it’s off to watch some television until I fall asleep, and hope the government will give me some clear pointers on what to do and what not to do, but without me having to even know I’m being steered to do the right thing, as decided by the Nudge Theory think-tank.  As long as I don’t have to think too much, or do much, that’ll suit me fine.

Time for my one glass of wine.

Next week – more fecklessness, or possibly some recklessness.

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

The Paris Commune of 1871: Part 2

 Articles, History, Information  No Responses »
Mar 282013
 

Last  week marked the 242nd anniversary of the Paris Commune of 1871. The Commune was one of the most important examples in history of people taking control of their own lives and reorganising their society. In the second part of Simon Gall’s two-part analysis of the Commune through the eyes of some important progressive scholars, we examine its destruction by the French government in May 1871, but learn how its legacy lives on and how it has influenced and inspired the generations since.

commune
The Downfall of the Commune

On 21 May, Versailles troops entered Paris and spent seven days massacring “defenceless Men, Women and Children”.

They were “cut to pieces” and “shot down in hundreds by mitrailleuse fire”.

There were random street executions and accounts of people being buried alive after the firing squads had failed to do their jobs properly.

Marx wrote, “Even the atrocities of the bourgeois in June, 1848, vanish before the ineffable infamy of 1871” and continued, “the great problem…(was) how to get rid of the heaps of corpses…after the battle was over. About 30,000 Parisians were shot down by the bestial soldiery, and about 45,000 were arrested, many of whom were afterwards executed, while thousands were transported or exiled.”

Opinions on the Commune

The Communards were endlessly praised by socialist writers the world over for their determination and bravery in attempting to bring about a new society, but many also offered their own analysis of what went wrong. All realised that the cards were stacked against the Commune from the beginning.

Indeed the situation led Peter Kropotkin to write, “The Commune of 1871 could be nothing but a first attempt. Beginning at the close of a great war, hemmed in between two armies ready to join hands and crush the people.” Nevertheless, scholars gave their opinions on the movement.

Peter Kropotkin was both heartened and disheartened by the Commune.

He saw traces of Anarchism in its governance, “By proclaiming the free Commune, the people of Paris proclaimed an essential anarchist principle, which was the breakdown of the State” and recognised its historical importance when he stated that with the movement of the “Commune of Paris a new idea was born”, and that it was “to become the starting point for future revolutions.”

In the months following the fall of the Commune, the luxury of hindsight meant that he was able to ponder calmly what he felt went wrong.

The first problem he noted was, “It neither boldly declared itself socialist nor proceeded to the expropriation of capital nor the organisation of labour. It did not even take stock of the general resources of the city….nor did it break with (in practice) the tradition of the State, of representative government…..they let themselves get carried away by the fetish worship of governments and set one up of their own.”

He felt that the Commune went some way towards realising the vision of a stateless society

He felt that this led to elected representatives falling out of touch with the electorate. He proposed that they had lost the “inspiration which only comes from continual contact with the masses” and had become “paralyzed by their separation from the people” and that “they themselves (had) paralyzed the popular initiative.”

In 1892, he continued his observations on the Commune, noting that the hunger that plagued Paris had been instrumental in the downfall of the revolution, the “Commune perished for lack of combatants. It had taken for the separation of Church and State, but it neglected, alas, until too late, to take measures for providing the people with bread.”

Mikhail Bakunin joyously claimed that, “Revolutionary Socialism (Anarchism) has just attempted its first striking and practical demonstration in the Paris Commune.” He felt that the Commune went some way towards realising the vision of a stateless society. Federated Communes, delegates bound by the imperative mandate, and the concept of instant recall were concepts which Bakunin had been discussing since around 1848.

He continued, “I am a supporter (of the Commune), above all, because of it was a bold, clearly formulated negation of the State.”

Whilst being careful to never lay blame at any Communard door he observed, “The proletariat of the great cities of France, and even of Paris, still cling to many Jacobin (radical bourgeois) prejudices, and to many dictatorial and governmental concepts. The cult of authority – the fatal result of religious education, that historic source of all evils, deprivations, and servitude – has not yet been completely eradicated in them.”

To him, the influence of the Jacobins “was the great misfortune for the Commune” because “they were paralyzed, and they paralyzed the Commune….they lacked the time and even the capacity to overcome and subdue many of their own bourgeois prejudices which were contrary to their newly acquired socialism.”

Karl Marx wrote one of the most comprehensive accounts of the Paris Commune, praising the revolution with the best of words, “Working mens’ Paris, with its Commune, will be forever celebrated as the glorious harbinger of a new society. Its martyrs are enshrined in the great heart of the working class. Its exterminators’ history has already nailed to that eternal pillory from which all the prayers of their priest will not avail to redeem them.”

launching a resolute offensive against Versailles would have crowned its victory in Paris

He was immensely proud of what the Commune had achieved, despite being unconvinced about it at its inception. When he heard of the plan to overthrow the Government, he called the plan “a folly of despair.”

He changed his tune and began watching in awe as the proletariat of Paris took the reins. The movement had such a profound effect on their thinking that in 1872 he and Friedrich Engels edited the Communist Manifesto stating that, it was, in places out of date and declared “that the working class cannot simply lay hold of the ready-made state machinery and wield it for its own purposes.”

Later, Marx would call the Commune “the political form at last discovered under which to work out the economic emancipation of labour.” After Marx’s death in 1883, Engels wrote in March 1891, “Look at the Paris Commune.That was the Dictatorship of the Proletariat” using the Commune to prove their thinking.

In a letter to Dr. Kugelmann, Marx pointed to two mistakes the Communards made.

The first was that “They did not want to start the Civil War”. This point was pondered by Lenin years later. He felt that the Communards should have marched on Versailles because “launching a resolute offensive against Versailles would have crowned its victory in Paris”. He wrote that the hesitation “gave the Versailles Government time to gather dark forces and prepare for the blood-soaked week of May.”

He felt that the Commune aimed to achieve something very important – anti-parliamentarianism

The second mistake in Marx’s eyes was that the Central Committee of the National Guard “surrendered its power too soon, to make way for the Commune.” Presumably Marx thought that the Central Committee should have kept things under tighter control for longer, or perhaps decreed more reforms before resigning.

Lenin too paid tribute to the people of the Commune.

He wrote that the events and their actions were “unprecedented in history. Up to that time power had, as a rule, been in the hands of landowners and capitalists, ie the hands of their trusted agents who made up the so-called government.” He noted its importance as a grassroots movement by stating that “no one consciously prepared it in an organised way.”

He felt that the Commune aimed to achieve something very important – anti-parliamentarianism. It was to be “a working body” that sought to combine the work of the executive and legislative branches of government into one.

This was vital for Lenin as it stopped Parliament from becoming just a talking shop for “the parliamentarians must themselves work, must themselves execute their own laws, must themselves verify their results in actual life, must themselves be directly responsible to their electorate.”

However, he criticised the Commune for not “expropriating the expropriators”. He noted that large organisations, such as the Bank of France had not been targeted. The Communards could have made use of the capital. Also, he wrote that there was “no workers’ party, the working class had not gone through a long school of struggle and was unprepared.”

Despite his criticisms, Lenin diligently noted that “the chief thing which the Commune lacked was time – an opportunity to take stock of the situation and to embark upon the fulfilment of its programme…The Commune had to concentrate primarily on self-defence…it had no time to think seriously of anything else.”

Conclusion

The Commune is held up as proof by both anarchists and socialists of how their ideas and theories work in practice. The anarchists saw it as a negation of the state and the socialists saw it as the functioning Dictatorship of the Proletariat.

It is still the subject of much analysis and discussion in academia and among activists and trade unionists around the world. It has been examined on numerous occasions by the arts.  La Commune Film is one example.

It has inspired and continues to inspire people in search of alternative ways of living.

References and further reading

M Bakunin        The Paris Commune and the Idea of the State

F Engels          Introduction to The Civil War in France

F Engels          Reflection in Introduction

P Kropotkin      The Conquest of Bread

P Kropotkin      The Commune of Paris

V Lenin             Lenin on the Commune

V Lenin             Lenin on the Commune – Experience of the Paris Commune of 1871 – Marx’s Analysis

V Lenin             Lenin on the Commune – Lessons from the Commune

V Lenin             In Memory of the Commune

K Marx               The Civil War in France

K Marx               Letters to Dr.Kugelmann on the Paris Commune

Reasons To Be Cheerful – Part 3

 Featured, Opinion, Satire and Humour  No Responses »
Mar 282013
 

I often have a wee laugh to myself when I read about the cost to the UK economy of the Royal Wedding or a public holiday. It seems that a national bank holiday costs the economy a whopping £2.3 bn according to The Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR), writes Duncan Harley.

Snowplough Keith

Of course, if bank holidays or royals can’t be blamed for our economic ills, there is always the weather.
This week’s tabloid headlines have pointed to snow as the real culprit for the recession.
I am guessing that greedy bankers are off the hook, as are western capitalist models of economic theory!

If the snow really is to blame though, 2012 should have been a bumper year for the UK economy, as barely a flake fell during the winter months yet the economy continued to nosedive.

Spare a thought though for the people of Greek Cyprus. It’s a balmy 20C in Nicosia at present with little prospect of snow. In fact the Troodos mountain ski resort website advises, ‘Fresh snow is forecast at 0 resorts. Powder is reported at 0 resorts and 0 are reporting good piste conditions.’

There seems little evidence that snow, or indeed inclement weather, has played any part in the economic woes of that country.

The banks and government of Cyprus are reported to be taking action in an attempt to stop a bank run when branches reopen at 1000 GMT Thursday March 28. The only problem may be that the money may have already moved to colder climes!

As usual, it’s the ordinary Cypriot folk who will lose out as will, of course, thousands of UK expats who had decided to retire to that island paradise and are now stuck with an EEC-led raid on savings which, according to news reports, amounts to a devaluation of capital of up to 30%.

For many Greek Cypriots who lost land and property in the 1974 war with Turkey, this must seem like yet another unfair economic body blow.

The RAF has come to the rescue of forces personnel affected by the crisis by using a Hercules Transport to fly a million or so Euros in small denomination notes from the UK to Cyprus. That’s £850000 @ 2.6 gallons per minute @ £6.27 per gallon. The flight is around 2135 miles and takes 4 hours and 8 minutes.

I can’t even begin to persuade my calculator to work out the cost per Euro per mile of this operation and I suppose a simple bank transfer was indeed out of the question due to the banks in the country being closed for a few days.

However, there is no such rescue package in place for the locals.

cyprus-j
Rumours of money laundering via the Cypriot banks abound and there is an emerging scandal about an alleged outflow of money to Eastern Europe, just in time to avoid the bank deposit tax deadline. As is often the case, the rich may well have been forewarned, although they will no doubt claim that they foresaw the disaster and acted in a completely sensible and honest manner.

Somewhat amazingly, the Bank of Cyprus UK’s website still claims that, ‘There are a number of reasons why Bank of Cyprus UK is a safe and attractive home for your savings and a strong banking partner for your business.’

I wonder if anyone will feel able to trust the UK subsidiary of a bank which came within hours of failing, then effectively decided to pay negative interest to its investors?

According to The Guardian, the Bank of Cyprus is 9.7% owned by Dmitry Rybolovlev, a Russian based in Monaco whose wealth is estimated at $9.1bn. I wonder how much Mr Rybolovlev lost in the debacle?

Seemingly another Russian oligarch, Alexander Lebedev, played down the amount he stood to lose in Cyprus as no more than $10,000. ‘It’s not worth talking about,’ he said. ‘Cyprus was always a transit jurisdiction, money would pass through and then go to Lithuania, Latvia, Belize, Switzerland, everywhere.’

Lebedev, the multimillionaire owner of the Evening Standard and Independent, expressed doubts that capital controls, to be imposed by the Cypriot government to stem a bank run, would work.

‘Certain schemes can be put into place,’ Lebedev said, ‘This is how Cyprus was making money.’

Many folk in the UK would associate this process with money laundering although politicians in the ex British colony have strongly denied that that has ever been the case.

Despite such denials, there can be no doubt that there is a strong Russian influence on the Greek Cypriot economy. Indeed the picture-postcard town of Limassol has become jokingly known as ‘Limassolgrad’ by locals with around 30,000 of the municipality’s 183,000 citizens being of Eastern European origin.

Unsurprisingly, the Moscow elite are unhappy. President Putin denounced the EU-IMF plan to eviscerate private bank accounts in Cyprus as ‘unfair, unprofessional and dangerous.’ Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev called the move ‘outright theft’.

The Daily Beast reports, ‘what’s striking about the Kremlin’s spirited opposition to the raid on Cyprus’s banks is that the island is Russia’s preferred destination for hiding and laundering money. In effect, Putin has been standing up for the rights of Russia’s tax avoiders.’

The Kremlin is reported to have been under pressure to increase its 2.5bn Euro loan to the country to bail out the economy. Since the Greek Cypriot national income is 18bn Euros per annum, even the current loan level makes Russia a major player in the cash strapped country’s affairs.

Makes you glad that that the UK is not owned by foreigners.

That is, of course, unless you count:

The Clydesdale Bank, Alliance and Leicester, Jaguar, Land Rover, MG Rover, P&O, Chelsea FC, Manchester United FC, Liverpool FC, BAA, Abbey National, British Steel, Pilkington, Boots, Harrods, ICI, Cadbury, Fortnum & Mason, Rolls-Royce and Bentley Motors , The Dorchester, Innocent, Wiseman’s Dairies and Forth Ports.

Sources:

Reasons to be Cheerful (Inspired when roadie Charley almost got electrocuted in Italy by a microphone stand while leaning over a mixing desk. Another roadie saved his life.): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasons_to_be_Cheerful,_Part_3

Snow blamed for economic gloom: http://www.nebusiness.co.uk/business-news/latest-business-news/2013/02/16/heavy-snow-blamed-for-shock-fall-in-retail-sales-51140-32819692/

Cost of public holidays: http://metro.co.uk/tag/centre-for-economics-and-business-research/

Cyprus Banks: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/26/cyprus-banks-closed-prevent-run-deposits

Money Laundering: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/26/moscow-s-mysterious-move-on-cyprus.html

Bank of Cyprus UK: http://www.bankofcyprus.co.uk/Business-Banking/

UK brands owned abroad: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2129507/Britain-sale-Uniquely-world-Britain-sold-half-companies-foreigners-And-paying-price.html

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

The Paris Commune of 1871: Part 1

 History, Information  No Responses »
Mar 212013
 

This week marks the 242nd anniversary of the Paris Commune of 1871. The Commune was one of the most important examples in history of people taking control of their own lives and reorganising their society. In the first part of Simon Gall’s two-part examination of the Commune through the eyes of some important progressive scholars, we take a look at how the Commune came about, its short history and its structure.

The experiment ended in May 1871 when it was destroyed by the French government, but its legacy lives on and it continues to inspire. The Commune was the subject matter of the Socialist and Anarchist anthem, “L’Internationale”

The Commune and its importance.

“Working men’s Paris, with its Commune, will be forever celebrated as the glorious harbinger of a new society. Its martyrs are enshrined in the great heart of the working class. Its exterminators’ history has already nailed to that eternal pillory from which all the prayers of their priest will not avail to redeem them.” – K Marx – The Civil War in France

“Paris inflicting a mortal blow upon the political traditions of the bourgeois radicalism and giving a real basis to revolutionary socialism (anarchism) against the reactionaries of France and Europe….Paris destroying nationalism and erecting the religion of humanity upon its ruins; Paris proclaiming herself humanitarian and atheist, and replacing divine fictions with the great realities of social life and faith in science.” – M Bakunin – The Paris Commune and the Idea of the State

“It was an event unprecedented in history. Up to that time power had, as a rule, been in the hands of landowners and capitalists, ie the hands of their trusted agents who made up the so-called government.” V Lenin – Lenin on the Commune – 3 – In Memory of the Commune

“The direct antithesis of the Empire was the Commune.” – K Marx – The Civil War in France

 “The political form at last discovered under which to work out the economic emancipation of labour.” – K Marx – The Civil War in France

Overview

commune
In 1871, the citizens of Paris took control of their own destinies and sought to break with the idea of bourgeois government, by seizing Paris and moulding it into something new.

On 18 March, they proclaimed the Commune and began dismantling the old Bonapartist structures of government.

People grew excited at the prospect of being masters of their own lives as the Commune began promulgating revolutionary decrees. However, after only 72 days, the rebellion was ferociously crushed by Government troops in a seven-day massacre.

Tens of thousands lost their lives but the idea lived, and still lives on. The experience of Communards changed political thinking forever and provided a sort of blueprint, or the beginnings of a blueprint, for future revolutions.

Lenin wrote of the Commune,

“The significance of the Commune, furthermore, lies in the fact that it endeavoured to crush, to smash to its very foundations, the bourgeois state apparatus, the bureaucratic, judicial, military and police machine, and to replace it by a self-governing, mass worker’s organisation in which there was no division between legislative and executive power.”  – Lenin on the Commune – 6. Bourgeois Democracy

Who what when where why?

In July 1870, French Emperor Louis Bonaparte (Napoleon III) declares war on Prussia. However, only three months later, he and his General, MacMahon, are captured along with more than 80000 soldiers at the Battle of Sedan. On hearing the news, the workers of Paris storm the Palais Bourbon and force the legislative body to proclaim the fall of the Second Empire.

By evening, the provisional Government of National Defence (GND) is formed, “All Parisians capable of bearing arms had enrolled in the National Guard and were armed” and the Third Republic is proclaimed.

In the next few weeks, Bonaparte’s forces surrender and, by October 31, the GND is ready to begin negotiations with the Prussians, but the Parisian workers rebel. The enemy reaches Paris but is only allowed a small corner of the capital by the Parisians. The Prussians disarm the city’s Mobile Guard but permit the National Guard to keep their weapons.

The revolutionary sections of the National Guard form the Central Committee to coordinate matters inside Paris and the newly-formed government of Adolphe Theirs flees to Versailles in March.

On the 18 March, Theirs sends government troops to disarm Paris but the soldiers refuse to carry out their orders and instead turn their guns on their Generals Claude Martin Lecomte and Jacques Leonard Clement Thomas. Some soldiers join the Commune. Thiers is outraged and the Civil War begins.

The Paris Commune was elected through universal suffrage on the 26 March 1871.

The Structure of the Commune

The Paris Commune

“made use of two infallible means. In the first place, it filled all posts – administration, judicial and educational – by election on the basis of universal suffrage of all concerned, subject to the right of recall at any time by the same electors. And, in the second place, all officials, high or low, were paid only the wages received by other workers.” The maximum wage was set at 6000 francs, providing “an effective barrier to place-hunting and careerism…even apart from the binding mandate to delegates to representative bodies.”

The Commune was to spread across France. It was to be the structure of even the smallest hamlets.

“Rural Communes of every district were to administer their common affairs by an assembly of delegates (with the imperative mandate) in the central town” and was to be a “working body, not a parliamentary body, executive and legislative at the same time.”

Marx noted that the Municipal Councillors were “naturally working men, or acknowledged representatives of the working class.”

Decrees and Actions of the Commune

28 March

The Central Committee of the National Guard dissolves itself after decreeing the abolition of the Police.

30 March

The Commune abolishes conscription and the Army and declares the National Guard, comprising everyone who can bear arms, to be the sole armed force.

The Commune remits all payments of rent for dwelling houses from October 1870 until April 1871, with the amounts already paid to be used as future rent payments.

Foreigners elected to the Commune were confirmed in office. “The flag of the Commune is the flag of the World Republic”

1 April

Maximum wage set for Commune at 6000 francs (£4)

2 April

The Commune decreed the separation of Church and State. It abolished all state payments for religious purposes (priests’ wages etc) and all property was to become national property.

5th April

In response to the daily shooting of Commune prisoners by Versailles troops it was decreed that NO prisoner of the Commune should be shot.

6th April

La Guillotine was brought into the street by the National Guard and publicly burned “amid great popular rejoicing.”

8th April

Religious symbols, pictures, dogmas and prayers were excluded from schools.

12th April

The Commune decides to destroy Napoleon’s victory column, made from smelted weapons captured from a fallen army, as a symbol of nationalistic chauvinism.

16th April

Review of closed factories with a view to organising worker’s control of those factories in the form of co-operatives. The co-operatives were to federate into one great co-operative union. In the end 43 factories were organised this way.

30th April

Pawnshops were closed as they were “in contradiction with the right of the workers to their instruments of labour and to credit.”

5th May

The Commune orders the razing of the Chapel of Atonement which had been built in expiation of the execution of Louis XVI

9th May

The Versailles army closes in on Paris and captures its first Parisian fort.

10th May

The Treaty of Frankfurt is signed by Bismarck, the Prussian Chancellor, and Thiers the head of the French Government. The conditions were set out mainly by Prussia as they were in the strongest position. The deal was that France would pay Prussia 5bn Francs in indemnities over a shorter period of time than first agreed and Bismarck would continue the occupation of Parisian forts until he “should feel satisfied with the state of things in France”, making him the “supreme arbiter in internal French politics”. In return, Bismarck would release the remaining “100,000 French prisoners of war to help crush revolutionary Paris.”

References and further reading

M Bakunin        The Paris Commune and the Idea of the State

F Engels           Introduction to The Civil War in France

F Engels          Reflection in Introduction

P Kropotkin      The Conquest of Bread

P Kropotkin      The Commune of Paris

V Lenin             Lenin on the Commune

V Lenin             Lenin on the Commune – Experience of the Paris Commune of 1871 – Marx’s Analysis

V Lenin             Lenin on the Commune – Lessons from the Commune

V Lenin             In Memory of the Commune

K Marx               The Civil War in France

K Marx               Letters to Dr.Kugelmann on the Paris Commune

In part 2 of Simon’s brief overview of the Commune, he will detail its destruction, the lessons that writers and political historians have learned from it and how its influence still permeates radical and progressive thinking nearly 250 years later.

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

MSYP Slams Proposal To Cut College Funding

 Aberdeen City, News  No Responses »
Feb 022013
 

kris-msyp-photo
A local Scottish Youth Parliamentarian says the government is ‘creating a lost generation.’  With thanks to Kenneth Watt.

Earlier this week Kris Chapman ( pictured ) of Aberdeen City Youth Council, who is also a Member of the Scottish Youth Parliament (MSYP), met the President of Aberdeen College Student Association to discuss the drastic effects and implications which the Scottish Government’s proposal to cut £34.6 million of funding to Scotland’s Colleges would have on Aberdeen.

Following their meeting Mr Chapman said:

“The impact and long term ramifications this will have on Aberdeen, not only for those attending college now but those who would be looking to do so in the future, will be hugely significant to the North East.

“Our colleges across Scotland, just like Aberdeen, play a vital role in shaping our nation’s future, helping to provide a much need skilled workforce to help re-energise our weak economy.  I therefore finding it baffling that at a time when we should be investing in to our future to ensure that they have the skills for tomorrow, the Scottish Government is pulling the rug from under our young people’s feet and creating a lost generation.

“We have already seen that the number of support staff drop by more than half.  Aberdeen College’s campuses have decreased from four to two and the North East region’s only Service Engineering course has been dropped, forcing those in the Grampian region who would have studied to now look to Glasgow or Ayr.

“We are losing our young talent from the North East.

“If these cuts are to go ahead then it will see Aberdeen College’s budget slashed by up to 50% in the next few years.

 “I strongly urge the Scottish Government to rethink these proposals, to invest in our colleges and fund Scotland’s future for generations to come.”

Summing up the situation, Lani Baird, President of Aberdeen College Students’ Association said:

“In these tough economic times, with such high unemployment, we need to recognise the role that colleges play, and ensure that they are well-funded.

“Aberdeen, Banff and Buchan, and other colleges in the North East have the ability to change communities and lives, whether it’s by creating opportunities for people to enter post-16 education for the first time, or by giving them the opportunity to return to education to learn new skills for new jobs.

“If we’re to protect students in the northeast and throughout Scotland, we need to fund our colleges.  

“In the coming days, we will be asking MSPs from all parties in the north-east to listen to our students and work together to reverse the £34.6M cuts proposed for colleges, and fund Scotland’s future.”

 Commenting after the discussions between Kris and Lani, Chair of Aberdeen City Youth Council Barry Black noted:

“Aberdeen College is vital to our economy and society.  Not only does it provide an alternative route to University, it supplies the skills and qualifications essential to open up to doors to many careers.  It is also essential for lifelong learning.  

“In Aberdeen, we will have a huge skills gap in the energy sector by 2020 and we cannot hope to fill that gap through training and re-training people wishing to go into the energy sector without well-funded Further Education.”

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

The Curse Of The City Garden Project

 Aberdeen City, Featured, Information  1 Response »
Jan 112013
 

By Mike Shepherd.

utgreferendum
“History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.”  So said Karl Marx.

The Scottish press has recently been full of echoes of the City Garden Project. First up was Dundee’s unfortunate Victoria & Albert Museum project, where a shortfall in funds has caused serious delays in its completion.

And what do we read in the Guardian this week?

“When the V&A at Dundee project was unveiled in January 2010 the promoters claimed they could quickly raise more than £45m – divided into three £15m chunks to come from the Scottish government, national bodies such as the Heritage Lottery Fund, and wealthy private philanthropists and corporate donors. Two of these have not materialised: the scheme’s only financial backer at present is the Scottish government …. But no generous private donor or cash-rich corporation has yet committed money.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2013/jan/08/v-and-a-scottish-project-delayed

Aberdeen’s City Garden Project was also £15 million short of private funding, and was also looking for support from the Lottery Fund to the tune of £20 million. The financing for the City Garden was based more on hope than reality and had the project been approved, it would very likely have run into to the same difficulties as Dundee.

Next up is Glasgow. The Council want to revamp George Square. A short list of six designs from international architects has been drawn up à la City Garden Project and one looks remarkably similar to an early design, the one with glaikit people walking aimlessly across a vast expanse of city square.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-20948763

The language coming out of Glasgow is very similar to the tired clichés that were inflicted on the Aberdeen public for the last four years:

  • International hoohah… “Glasgow City Council say the project has ‘caught the imagination’ of the international design community.”
  • Overblown hyperbole… “This redevelopment is a hugely exciting moment in the growth of the city as Glasgow strives to forge ahead and meet its future challenges.”
  • Iconic… “The prestige of the companies competing to redevelop George Square is a clear indication of just how iconic it is around the world.”
  • – and horror of horrors: “Funding of up to £5m from the overall investment programme will enable early delivery of phase one of the George Square redevelopment with an additional £10m assumed within the Buchanan Quarter TIF Business Case.”   Oh dear, TIF…
    http://www.scotsman.com/news/george-square-designs-are-unveiled-1-2726634

And as if that wasn’t enough, take a breath before reading this one:

“A leading figure in Glasgow’s SNP group has called for a speedy poll on the plans to help decide the fate of the city’s George Square… ‘I’m calling for a city-wide referendum on the George Square proposals, similar to the vote last year in Aberdeen.’”
http://www.heraldscotland.com/demand-for-public-vote-on-future-of-george-square

And finally, one of the Glaswegian activists involved in the campaign (and organising a demo against the plans next month) wrote on Facebook:

“This is a topic of sometimes heated debate, but it seriously doesn’t need to be. We can all be mature and listen to the opinions of others without resorting to personal comments. It’s important that this page gives a good, positive message about what we want for George Square – there are obviously others that disagree with us and that is their democratic right in this country! 

“So let’s all keep the level of debate to a high standard here! Otherwise, we’ll never be taken seriously enough to gain any substantial political support!”

Good luck with that, then…

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

Salmond’s Web: Exclusive Correspondence Revealed

 Aberdeen City, Featured, Opinion  3 Responses »
Dec 062012
 

Aberdeen Voice’s Suzanne Kelly today received documents from the First Minister’s office shedding light on ‘Webgate’ – the genesis of the failed bid to build a granite web over Aberdeen’s Union Terrace Gardens. Kelly investigates.

UTG display
Aberdeen’s Granite Web is history; it will not go ahead, and the city will not be borrowing £90 million towards its construction.

Alex Salmond’s personal interest in the project was well publicised when it emerged his office had intervened in the TiF (Tax incremental Funding) bid appraisal for pilot projects in Scotland.

The appraisals were undertaken by the Scottish Futures Trust, which had placed the Aberdeen proposal 10th in the list of projects to be recommended based on a variety of financial and technical criteria.

Salmond’s intervention, at the expense of projects from Renfrewshire, West Lothian, Ayrshire and Dumbartonshire, propelled the web into position to be one of the potential pilots.

Correspondence between First Minister Alex Salmond, Sir Ian Wood and ACSEF has been released to Aberdeen Voice today under a Freedom of Information request. These letters shed further light on Salmond’s relationship with Sir Ian, who had promised £50 million of his own money towards the controversial £140m+ project.

Far from allowing local governments sovereignty over their own affairs, Salmond has shown, by intervening in the appraisal process, that central government can and will over-ride expert advice. He and Nicola Sturgeon have since said any TiF application for Aberdeen must involve Union Terrace Gardens – another intervention without precedent.

Although TiF is a pilot here, as a fundraising method it is already losing fans in its country of origin, the USA, where it is proving unsuccessful in several states. How central government can insist that a brand new, untested means of borrowing money cannot be used by Aberdeen unless it sacrifices its common good land park for a project runs contrary to cries of ‘freedom’ and ‘independence’ used by the SNP to encourage a vote for independence.

But what of Salmond’s correspondence on the subject of the web?

From the letters received, it is clear ACSEF and Sir Ian had been lobbying Salmond and his government to support the web – clearly with success. A letter of August 2011 indicates that Nicola Surgeon had been in contact with Sir Ian about the project. Here are some extracts:

August 2011: Alex Salmond to Ian Wood

“Thank you for your letter of 28 July updating me on progress with the Aberdeen City Garden Project. Nicola Sturgeon welcomed the opportunity to discuss these issues with you when she visited Aberdeen at the beginning of August…

“In relation to the TIF funding application, we are in the process of identifying further projects which can be included in the TIF pilot scheme. I understand that Aberdeen City Council will submit an outline proposal to the Scottish Futures Trust this month in accordance with the process that has been agreed. We look forward to considering this further.”
See – https://aberdeenvoice.com/2012/11/salmond-to-wood-aug-2011/

It is clear Salmond has admiration for Wood; could this have coloured his judgement when he saw fit to intervene in the recommended TiF projects?

19 July 2012: Salmond to Wood

“I would like to take this opportunity on behalf of the Scottish Government to thank you for the considerable contribution you have made to both the oil and gas industry in Scotland and to Scottish public life…”

[note: this contribution had not included paying NI on Wood Group staff for a number of years; the payroll was moved offshore]

“Your involvement in Scottish Enterprise Grampian and your successful previous chairmanship of the Scottish Enterprise Board have set the bar for others to follow… I have enjoyed meeting with you over recent years and very much appreciated the enthusiasm and dedication which you have brought to the Wood Group, the industry and more widely to Scotland…”
See – https://aberdeenvoice.com/2012/11/salmond-to-wood-19-07-12/

[note – initially Scottish Enterprise were supporting Peacock Visual Arts’ own plans for premises in Union Terrace Gardens. It is not precisely clear at the time of writing how the Peacock bid lost SE’s support, which quite quickly turned to Sir Ian’s favoured City Garden Project instead].

Sir Ian returned the 19 July letter in part as follows:

01 August 2012: Wood to Salmond

“I have been particularly grateful for the support your Government have provided to the Aberdeen City Centre Regeneration Project which, as you know, I believe is vitally important for Aberdeen’s long-term economic future and wellbeing.

“The vote of Aberdeen City Council on 22nd August will be crucial, and if this is positive I will obviously allocate some of my time to support the development phase of this project in any way I can, and I know there will be an important role for Scottish Government to play in facilitating this. If the vote is negative, Wood Family Trust will have no choice but to withdraw their offer of funding.”
 See  – https://aberdeenvoice.com/2012/11/wood-to-salmond-01-08-12/

The first part of the paragraph above begs the question: why did the government support the City Gardens Project at the expense of others on the table, several of which were given higher ratings by the Scottish Futures Trust? Concerning the potential withdrawal of the £50 million offer, there is some ambiguity.

A statement from Sir Ian indicated this money would be deployed to charitable work in Africa, a most laudable act, indeed. The nature of this charitable work may or may not be the same as a project described on the Wood Family Trust website, in which they seek to improve the business acumen of tea plantation operatives in Rwanda, a country only just recovering from civil war, an aids epidemic, widespread hunger and poverty.

A further letter shows evidence of yet more lobbying; this time by a private trust, signed jointly by Tom Smith (ACSEF and the Trust) and Ian Wood:

28 July 2012:  Aberdeen City Gardens Trust, ACSEF and Wood to Salmond

“The concept designs will be available to exhibit to the public late September with the public asked to indicate their views… with the winning concept design presented to  Aberdeen City Council to endorse.

“The current plan is that by mid-December the city council will be in a position to approve the TiF business case prior to it being submitted to the Scottish Futures Trust. It goes without saying that the Project will not proceed without TiF funding.

“We’d be very happy to discuss this with you further… We will also be seeking some further discussion with John Swinney…”
See – https://aberdeenvoice.com/2012/11/wood-smith-acgt-acsef-to-salmond-28-07-11/

The striking feature of this letter is that it indicates the city council is not in the driving seat. The council is expected not to debate or vote; it is expected to ‘endorse’ and ‘approve.’

The Aberdeen City Gardens Trust (ACGT) is a private entity set up to run the City Gardens Project that listed Tom Smith (also of ACSEF, and formerly Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of  Commerce) and Colin Crosby (A&GCoC) as its two directors. It is therefore of further interest to note that in this letter of 28 July 2011, ACGT lobbies Salmond with praise for the scheme and seeks further meetings with both Salmond and Sturgeon.

ACSEF is paid for by the city and by extension the public, and the public were very much split on whether or not this project and its associated, high-level financing were acceptable. Precisely how ethical it was for a publicly funded body like ACSEF to forward a scheme favoured by its private sector members and also to expect the city to endorse its recommendations is unclear.

Sir Ian Wood, signatory on the ACGT letter, apparently had no official connection to ACGT (Companies House lists three directors of this trust). There seems to have been no tendering process for the ACGT to be handed a management role over the garden project uncontested and unelected.

If Ian Wood had influence over the ACGT as the letter indicates, as well as influence over the project via the Wood Family Trust, his influence over the project arguably would have outweighed that of the council. 

Remembering that the land in question is common good land, not to be changed in usage per its ancient grant, the thin edge of the web towards privatisation is a worrying precedent.

The contents of these letters raise serious questions about the continued future of ACSEF, and the genesis and advancement of the Aberdeen City Gardens Trust as the proposed management body/special purpose vehicle for the scheme. Aberdeen City Council should reappraise ACSEF’s future, and at least ensure that ACSEF is not dictating policy going forward.

The most concerning issue emerging from these letters, however, is how the First Minister and his cabinet members were lobbied successfully and elevated a scheme from an Aberdeen billionaire above more fiscally credible schemes from other parts of Scotland.

Aberdeen Voice is pleased to offer readers the opportunity to read these letters, giving an important insight into this recent chapter of local history. While the Granite Web is truly consigned to the dustbin, the actions of those in positions of power who tried to foist the scheme on the public are still very much with us.

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

Aberdeen Stands With Gaza

 Aberdeen City, Events, Featured, Information  No Responses »
Nov 202012
 

Following the latest, ongoing outbreak of Israeli violence against the people of Gaza, citizens of Aberdeen demonstrate their solidarity and support for those under attack.  With thanks to Dave Black.

aberdeengaza127
On Saturday 17 November, some 50 people gathered at short notice to show their support and solidarity for the people of Gaza, who are facing daily massacres at the hands of the Israeli Defence Force.
Meeting in Aberdeen’s St Nicholas Square, many carried flags or banners stating “Stand With Gaza” and “End Israeli War Crimes,” while shouts of “Free Palestine” rang in the air.

Powerful speeches were delivered by Brian Carroll (Aberdeen TUC President) and Tommy Campbell (Unite Regional Officer).

Veteran pro-Palestinian activist and member of Scottish Jews for a Just Peace Hilda Meers gave the crowd a moving rendition of her poem Erasure – Death-Dance for a Palestinian Child.

Many passers-by stopped and took the time to sign a petition demanding Alec Salmond immediately halts any political and economic relationships with Israel until the oppression of Gaza has ended and the human rights of Palestinians are recognised.

Plans for taking forward solidarity with the people of Gaza will be progressed at a public meeting upstairs at the Belmont Cinema this Thursday 22 November at 7.30pm.

The agenda will include building towards an Aberdeen-Gaza Skype link-up at 2pm on 08 December at the University of Aberdeen’s MacRobert Building (room 613). This event is aimed at hearing directly the experiences of people in Gaza, forging links between activists and interested groups/individuals in Aberdeen and Gaza and looking at how these can be taken forward in the future.

<<<<    >>>>

  ERASURE – Death-Dance For A Palestinian Child, As Seen On A Video From Gaza

(During the Israeli Cast Lead attack on Gaza, Israeli soldiers fired on Palestinian ambulances to prevent them carrying wounded civilians to hospital. Sixteen medics were killed, resulting in casualties being ferried in donkey carts).

See the donkey-cart driver
race along the road, fast, fast –
pulling up with a jerk, not a word,
now his journey’s done.
.
See a mother leap out of the cart.
As she runs, runs, runs,
see her feet pound the ground,
the child in her arms so still, silent and still.
.
A man comes at a run, running quick, quick,
he runs towards the woman,
his arms reach for the child who lies silent,
unmoving and silent in sheltering arms.
.
Then turning, he runs, runs fast, quickly nears,
nearing the open door he surrenders the child
to other arms reaching, to bring help
for the child lying silent and still.		 See the doctors bend over the hospital bed,
as they work for response from the child on the bed –
despairing at last, they must cover the head
of a child whose life has been stilled.
.
Whose life has been stilled,
has been stolen away,
the mother’s heart broken –
what more can I say?
.
What more can I say
What more can I do
As I try to convince you
This is our heartbreak too.
.
.
.
.
© Hilda Meers
 Older Entries  Newer Entries