Dave Watt asks Voice readers the question …..
Which one would you let watch your pet deer while you were on holiday?
Old Susannah looks back at the week that was. By Suzanne Kelly.
Old Susannah is enjoying a glass of ‘Hello… my name is Ingrid’ (a beautiful brew made with cloudberry) at Brewdog, and is reflecting on another busy week in the Deen.
There was the Periurban conference for one thing. This was announced last minute on the City’s website.
It was an international conference on how cities deal with land on the fringes of the urban areas. I guess people from around the world came to see how wonderfully Aberdeen treats Union Terrace Gardens, Tullos Hill, green space at Westhill and Cove, and Loirston Loch.
The two-day conference was opened by the pioneering champion of all things green: Kate Dean.
I sent in an application, and then found myself invited to the second day’s events. For some reason it seemed they didn’t want me on the first day. I heard lots of important speakers, most of whom said urban sprawl is a problem, and we must all use less resources and re-use what we can. Someone even said ‘planting trees is not a solution’ – Cllr HoMalone please take note.
We heard about city centres emptying out if there is too much urban sprawl, with shops closing and crime and social deprivation becoming a problem. I was just surprised no one from Aberdeen explained how our ‘improving’ Union Terrace Gardens into a car park, ‘cosmopolitan cafe’, the hoped-for monorail and building in the greenbelt were going to save the day. I would have loved to have heard it.
One City Council official kept turning around in their seat to look at me; for some reason they almost looked worried I was there. Could it have been the ‘Save the Tullos Deer’ t-shirt I wore under my suit jacket?
Someone was there from a local green charity, and somehow I brought up the deer cull situation (my t-shirt might have helped). The person had no idea why the Scottish SPCA was against the cull and what the other issues were. I happily explained.
Elsewhere in the Deen, someone has decided to leave a cat in a wheelie bin. Perhaps they want as much media attention as the woman from Coventry got? You may remember Mary Bale who cruelly left a cat in a bin for hours on end and was caught out. Let’s see if we can’t find the Aberdeen copycat cat botherer and do for them what the press did for Bale.
It would likewise be a shame if shamed Banff Brothers David and Colin Reid of 22 Boyndie Street West, Banff, got any bad press for their dogfighting activity conviction and jail sentences.
This is the Scottish SPCA’s first major dogfighting conviction in Aberdeenshire (where officials denied there was a problem, you may recall), and it is cause for celebration. The Reids must know something about other dog fighters – let’s hope they roll over. Thankfully, some of the dogs they were abusing have been rescued.
But anyway, here I am in Brewdog wondering what to write about this week.
I am looking at a recent Press & Journal headline which screams in giant letters: ‘IS THIS THE MOST HATED MAN IN SCOTLAND?‘ As I am always happy to follow where the P&J leads, so let’s skip definitions this week and take a look at the most hated man in Scotland instead.
Imagine one man using the legal system to the maximum for his own self-interested ends. Imagine him standing alone, unwilling to listen to the thousands of people who want him to abandon the battle.
Imagine for a minute how much taxpayer money and court time he is willing to use up.
Yes, Mr Milne may well be the most hated man in Scotland. For openers there is the legal battle which he’s taking all the way to the highest court in the UK. For those who don’t know, Milne bought land from the City Council – 11 acres in Westhill – for some £335,000. (By the way, who do the rest of us have to know to get deals like that? Jane – can you help?). The land is worth millions.
Apparently Milne agreed with the City to pay a portion of any sale/rental profit to the City. In a really sharp, not at all transparent move, the land was sold from one arm of the vast Milne empire to another Milne company. As you’d expect, such a deal cost over £500,000 to do. Or so Milne claims when his companies say there was no profit left after the sale. Seems pretty clear to me.
Yes, Milne is appealing (but not to most of us).
You’d have thought that our very generous Council wouldn’t go bothering Stew for a mere 1.7 million pounds (goodness knows the City can waste that much with ease), but it seems the City will be trying to claw back the money.
The courts found in the City’s favour – but Milne would rather drag us on through the legal system and cost the taxpayer more money than shell out.
Yes, Milne is appealing (but not to most of us). Of course if you weigh this against all the associated costs, then there probably won’t be much financial gain. Here’s a clever idea: let’s stop selling our assets at less money than they are worth. Who knows? We might wind up less than the £50 million in debt we currently are. But back to Milne.
We come to the subject of the once-beautiful game. Someone’s decided it’s much better to do land deals than try and win matches.
Milne will develop Pittodrie (which could have been rennovated – this has been done elsewhere in the UK) and build in the greenbelt well out of town. Loirston Loch will be greatly improved by the new stadium. What the remaining wildlife will make of the lack of land, the cars, the additional pollution and inevitable trash is another matter.
I wonder what it’s like to be less popular than the Donald? Will the Dons become the Donalds?
The bottom line is the stadium will glow in the dark (!) and we can have Elton John and Rod Stewart concerts!. (Who cares that two BBC stories this week prove another link between ill health and car exhaust fumes, and Scotland’s wildlife continues to diminish?)
You would have thought that AFC fans would be jumping for joy at the chance to drive/bus/walk to Loirston. Instead, many of them want Milne to jump ship. Things are so desperate that some fans are actively inviting Donald Trump to invest in the club. Ouch.
I wonder what it’s like to be less popular than the Donald? Will the Dons become the Donalds? Mr Milne might want to stay away from Facebook or AFC fan sites for a wee while, where there is just a hint of dissatisfaction. Such ingratitude – and after all he’s done to us. Sorry – I mean ‘for us’.
Stew’s not very popular in the city centre either. In his proposal for Triple Kirks, he’s promised us more office buildings. Result!
So who’d have thought that putting two glass box buildings next to the Triple Kirk spire (and probably chasing those pesky peregrine falcons away in the process) could make you unpopular? There will be office space – and who wants anything more than more office space?
I’m afraid to say Mr Milne is now as popular with golfers as fox-batterer Forbes would be at an animal rights meeting.
The only problem is parking (not that that is hindering him developing Pittodrie or in creating the stadium – neither has adequate parking in their plans). Where on earth will Stew find any parking solutions close to Triple Kirks? If only there was some empty, under-used space nearby – maybe something that ‘only has grass’ in it. He could have car parking, the offices would go ahead without a hitch, he’d rake in some money.
People would be amazingly grateful: we would get parking, shopping and ‘cosmopolitan cafes’ – where we can sit and drink coffee year round and be, er, cosmopolitan. If only Stew or his pal Ian could think of some solution to the problem, it would mean more money for Milne. There are some people who think the consultation should have been handled by the city with a lengthy consultation, and that the listed status of Triple Kirks carried a bit of weight. These people were of course wrong.
And let’s face it: Milne could be low on cash. Am I alone in thinking he’s short? He’s chasing a mere 1.7 million through the courts (when he’s supposedly worth about 60 million). He’s about to lay off workers up and down Scotland – he says he can’t afford them.
Perhaps he expanded a bit too quickly? Perhaps he thought new building would continue for ever? Well – with our City Council it just might.
It seems a little ironic that the City is giving Milne contracts (some recent ones total over ten million) while he is both dragging the city through the courts and firing Aberdonians in the building trade. But the people who are in charge know best.
For reasons of space, I’ll limit this to just one more aspect of the man’s popularity. I’m afraid to say Mr Milne is now as popular with golfers as fox-batterer Forbes would be at an animal rights meeting. It seems that the Portlethen community council and those who use Portlethen Golf Club are up in arms over Milne’s plans to build 153 houses so close to the course that there may be a few problems. Safe to say, people are teed off.
There you have it. The Press & Journal had their own front-page suggestion for ‘the most hated man in Scotland.’ Some of us have a different candidate for that title.
Last word: City Council employees: stop criticising your wonderful employers and managers on the Intranet. First: they don’t like it and are drafting all kinds of means to stop your free speech. Second: that’s my job. I understand they may participate in a 24-hour ‘tweeting’ session to say what excellent services they’ve got going. You are cordially uninvited to tweet back.
By Bob Smith.
Noo the AWPR, We maun get there quick, We’ve aa heard the notion, The warld his geen mad, |
Time ti slow doon, Een o life’s sins , Some tak things ower far, A micht tak the piss, |
©Bob Smith “The Poetry Mannie” 2011
Image Credit: © Morteza Safataj | Dreamstime.com
Old Susannah watches the latest developments in the ‘Deen and the wider world and feels like a deer caught in headlights. Here is this week’s look at what’s happening where and who’s doing what to whom. By Suzanne Kelly.
Evening Express readers were rejoicing in the streets last weekend as the results of the ‘Happy Tots’ photo contest were revealed. Little wonder then, that there has been no word there or in the P&J of Anthony Baxter’s continued world tour of his award-winning film ‘You’ve Been Trumped, or the screening of Emily James’s film ‘Just Do It’ at the Belmont. Nor was there space for the little matter of the council’s ongoing deer debacle.
Word has it that the SNP is growing squeamish over the blood-letting that the little creatures (ie the LibDems) will suffer at the ballot box when the voting season opens, and are looking for a way out.
Let’s hope so. Not even the most gullible politician believes the promised carbon off-setting benefits of this unwanted forest has any merit. The Public Services Ombudsman likewise are weighing up the City’s actions over the deer. The Ombudsman may soon look at other matters, but that is another story for another time.
In the larger, non EE world, there is violence at every turn it seems. Happily we can all feel safer for a few reasons. One, the use of tasers seems to be going up in the UK. This seems to coincide with the number of deaths caused by tasers likewise increasing – but then again, that means less criminals on the streets.
It also means less innocent people on the streets, but you can’t have everything.
Tasers don’t cause severe agony I’m told, but there was a police official who was going to make a film demonstrating how innocuous the tasers were, using himself as a guinea pig. Unfortunately, he was in excruciating pain, and his little film didn’t have the desired effect. Tasers are only used by calm, rational, well-trained men, and not angry cops who might repeatedly taser a suspect until they die. Usually.
But I feel even safer still: the US Navy’s been spending time (and lots and lots of money) developing a means to make their weaponry even more deadly. It has been said that this new technology means weapons can explode with up to five times the energy of existing armaments. I guess this is their way of trying to be more energy efficient, so that’s quite good. As things stood, NATO was only able to destroy the world a few dozen times over. Now we can sleep soundly in our beds.
Old Susannah enjoyed the (mostly) sunny Tullos Hill picnic last Sunday and was happy to see some new faces there.
It is a beautiful hill with beautiful panoramic views over city and sea – so it’s got to go. Sadly, a second group of picnic-ers failed to find the main party, but a good time was still had.
Anyway, time for some definitions.
(noun) a collection of people who have managerial, supervisory, or other responsibilities and powers, e.g.. ‘Board of Directors’ ‘Board of Governors’.
Private company boards are established (normally) to oversee methods and manage reasonable, defined objectives. However, we are in Aberdeen, and are ruled by Aberdeen City Council.
There is no shortage of boards set up by the City and given powers – powers which are always used in a fair, reasonable and democratic way. The Licensing Board did itself proud two years ago; it ran straight to the Press & Journal to say a dozen or so restaurants and clubs, etc. were not compliant with new licensing laws. These wrong-doers were named and shamed in the press, and faced being closed, fined, and having their licenses revoked.
In a truly dramatic style, this was announced about a week before the traditional Christmas lunches and dinners were to be held.
Naturally you would expect a Board to have possession of all the facts before going to the papers. Yet somehow this board made a few tiny mistakes. A few of those it named as non-compliant with the law had, er, long gone out of business. Slightly more embarrassing, at least two of the named-and-shamed establishments were fully compliant, having jumped through hoops made of red tape.
Old Susannah had planned a lunch in such a place, and called the Board once I knew for certain how wrong the Board was. I spoke to a woman; she was very helpful. She asked me who I was to question the board, and told me I must be mistaken. However, a day or so later, the Board had gone back to the P&J with a grudging retraction. My Christmas lunch went ahead, and all was right.
But here are a few lines from the Board we should all be looking at:-
“The role of the Project Monitoring Group is to oversee the Union Terrace City Garden project’s progress and ensure that Council’s interests, and that of the majority of Aberdeen citizens, are protected as the project progresses. The membership of the Project Monitoring Group comprises Councillors Malone (Chair), Boulton, McDonald, Kirsty West, Wisely, Young and Yuill”.
“For reference, the membership of the City Garden Project Management Board comprises Councillor John Stewart (Chair), Councillor Callum McCaig and Valerie Watts, ACC; Tom Smith and Colin Crosby, ACSEF; Jennifer Craw, the Wood Family Trust; Bob Collier, Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce; John Michie, Aberdeen City Centre Association; Lavina Massie, the Aberdeen City Alliance, Maggie McGinlay, Scottish Enterprise and Paul Harris, Gray’s School of Art”.
– Aberdeen City Council Website
I guess it must be an Aberdonian thing, but here we have a board to oversee a project which 55% of people responding to a survey don’t support. (Arguably the number against ruining UTG is higher, as a tiny hiccough in the online voting system changed negative votes to positive ones – I guess it’s hard to use this new-fangled technology).
Isn’t it wonderful that this Board just sprang into being without the need to trouble the taxpayer or voter as to their thoughts?
Perhaps it will be a difficult job to be a board member here – for one thing these selfless souls have to ‘oversee the progress’ of the project which is unknown (there is no scope, timescale or budget agreed – but I’m splitting hairs). If you look at the paragraphs above, you might get the idea that not progressing the project is not an option.
The tricky bit will be how on earth to ‘ensure that Council’s interests, AND that of the majority of Aberdeen citizens, are protected as the project progresses.’
I vote we protect the Council’s interests above all else. The project will progress, and the vastly different interests of the Council and the citizen somehow have to be both ‘protected’. This Board (led by one Mr Gerry Brough) has so far protected us by employing a wide range of techniques.
These include setting up a company to take the project forward with no mandate from the people, stacking the board with people who want a Wood Group solution for UTG, and by redacting minutes to protect us from truth. I feel as protected by Gerry Brough and this board as I do by the US Navy and its brand new super-explosives.
It is unclear who designed the make-up of this board, but I wonder – did they have a small, subconscious desire for the project to go ahead?
It almost seems as if most of these people are desperate for the gardens to be turned into whatever Wood (and Milne) want. Then again, the presence of Jennifer Craw to represent the Wood Family Trust is a reassuring sign that everything is totally impartial and ‘above Board’.
Citizens opposed to the project should not bother their heads about the decision the board made: there will be no opportunity at the upcoming public consultation to vote to leave the gardens as is. You get to vote on which of the six shortlisted projects (again chosen by a handful of non-elected people) you want – and that’s that. And this wonderful, unbiased board has just decided at its last meeting to start lobbying government officials to pressure them to go ahead and fill in our garden.
If you want to write to the Board and tell them how happy you are with their work so far, please do. And if you feel like doing some lobbying of your own, you can always write to the Scottish Futures Trust to tell them how happy you are about these fantastic garden-raising plans.
The City is some £50,000,000 in the red
But of all the many boards we have working hard to keep Aberdeen the efficient vibrant, dynamic hub it is, there is a board composed completely of planks.
I refer of course to the Budget Monitoring Board: the City is some 50 million pounds in the red that we know of. That really is some job they have managed these past few years.
(noun) system of government wherein a single person or small group has undemocratic control and powers over the citizenry; often a totalitarian state.
Despite their threatening and irrational behaviour, it looks as if some of the world’s most hated dictators are set to topple. These hated figures have held onto power at all costs, some for many years, despite people demanding that they go. Dictators try to threaten journalists and other critics; they use threats of legal action to silence opposition. These dictators often look slightly deranged and dress in odd garments, and often look over-tired and slightly bloated.
One of my favourite quotes from the ‘Harry Potter’ series of books by the inimitable JK Rowling went something like this (I paraphrase).
“Dictators always fear the people that they oppress, for they know that one day, someone will rise above the masses and over-throw them.”
– Apologies for the bad phrasing JK, but it’s true. Those who come to power and then disregard clear voices of opposition and who do not play fairly will eventually be overthrown, or just voted out of office.
So dictators, do everyone a favour and just leave when asked to go. (PS – in a related development it seems that Libya has finally got rid of Gaddafi).
Next week: start queueing now: the great St. Nicholas House furniture sale is ON! Grab a future heirloom from the used, battered desks and chairs. You paid for them once – here’s your chance to pay for them again (not to mention the brand new furniture you bought for Marischal College). Sale stars 3 September.
By Bob Smith.
The AWPR can ging aheed
Maist fowk hiv gien a cheer
They micht aa yet be greetin
If it turns oot ower damn’t dear
Awa back a fyow eer ago
Fower hunner million wis the cost
Aa doot iss wull be far awa
Fae the final figure we’re tossed
A’ve nithing agin the roddie
Apairt fae far it gings
Ower bliddy near the toon
Destroyin ony benefit it brings
Dinna believe me? please yersel
Jist dee a wee bit speirin
Ye’ll fin aa ither by-passes
Hiv biggins near them appearin
Doon the line aboot ten eer on
Mair hooses and big sheddies aboot
Cars an larries gyaan ti an fro
Cumin on an aff iss route
Ti tak the HGV’s past the toon
Iss thocht we aa maun broach
AWPR shud be biggit farrer wast
So developers they canna encroach
Biggin the roddie far they wint
Is a folly fair complete
A fear ma freens we’ll fin oot
The AWPR micht become obsolete
© Bob Smith “The Poetry Mannie” 2011
Image credit: © Axel Drosta | Dreamstime.com
Old Susannah looks back at the week that was and wonders who’s up to what and why. By Suzanne Kelly.
The leak’s leaked. Those nice people at Shell seem to have been economical with the truth about their North Sea oil spill; they say they have been completely open and honest. However, some half a dozen environmental/animal groups do not think so.
I know whom I am tempted to believe. I hope Shell can do for us what it has done for Nigeria, farmers in Northern Ireland, etc. etc. If nothing else, it is good to know Shell has gone into public relations overdrive and is pouring oil on troubled waters.
Back on dry land, it is hard to know where to start doing a round-up of this past week’s events in the ‘Deen and the wider world. The Road Sense AWPR appeal has failed. Helpfully, Kate Dean posted on a Facebook discussion thread (you see – she is down with the kids for definite) stating:
“I’m amazed that this topical community hasn’t seen fit to discuss today’s Court of Session ruling on the Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route.”
I told our Katie:
“To Ms Dean – nice to see you weighing in. I think you will find this ‘topical community’ and the Aberdeen Voice have historically dealt with both sides of the AWPR story. As the Voice is a weekly publication, no doubt some contributors will send in relevant items for next week’s issue. You would be welcome to write a piece as well”.
Alas! Kate relied:
“I don’t think it would be appropriate for me to contribute to a publication which habitually refers to me in such a derogatory and insulting fashion”
I tried to explain that my writings are ‘satire’ (well, for the most part). Of course there is not much tradition of important politicians being satirised in Great Britain – well, only since the time of King John, and more recently Hogarth, Spitting Image and Private Eye. (I would have also replied: “XXXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXXXX”, but I could not figure out how to do redacted text on FB). Perhaps I just do not know the meaning of the word ‘appropriate’ – time to see what can be learnt from Kate’s examples (see definitions).
Perhaps Kate thinks that is the end of the AWPR matter, and the necessary, environmentally-friendly, economical road will go ahead. Well, we will see. PS – my Facebook Home page tells me to suggest friends for Kate. Any ideas?
And we have another nursing scandal; this time at Woolmanhill.
A nurse has allegedly been over-drugging patients, and gave a person a salt-cellar instead of their inhaler. We are getting close to a medical scandal a week. I wonder if all the cutbacks to frontline services might be related to frontline services going down the pan.
Old Susannah’s had a senior moment; I remembered writing about the brilliant designs shortlisted for the gardens, and thought I had done so in a column. Turns out I had only done so on Facebook. While trying to find what I did write, I googled my way upon this quotation:
“The gardens have the potential to be transformed in to a popular, attractive and vibrant green space in the heart of the city. The gardens have come under increasing pressure in recent years, with various schemes put forward to raise their level and develop them as a leisure facility. Care must be taken not to over-develop the space and potentially risk losing its essential drama and historical landform”.
– 2007, AberdeenCityCouncil Report
The above was the conclusion the City came to in (yet another expensive) report in 2007. Since then a few things have changed, and commonsense has prevailed: the only thing wrong with Aberdeen is that UTG is not vibrant and dynamic. This is why we are all going broke, crime is shooting up, the independent shops are closing, and the streets are filthy: it is the gardens – they are not used enough and are in a valley!
We may or may not get a vote on the Gardens’ future – but we have lined up five designers who have form when it comes to doubling and trebling their budgets. I guess if you want something as beautiful, as functional and elegant as the Diana Memorial Fountain in Hyde Park, it’s going to cost. Then again, an inflatable Jacuzzi (on sale via ‘Groupon’) would have been as pretty and functional – and costs a few million less.
I’m sure it’s because I didn’t study architecture in great depth, but at first glance I thought the shortlist was the most predictable collection of expensive hacks to ever build boring and unsuitable creations, obviously my mistake.
Still, the Diana Memorial Fountain designer is one of our fine finalists! I hope you are as excited as I am. Since I did not go into detail about the talented designers Malcolm Reading has lined up to fix our city’s problems and how much it is likely to cost and since I cannot find my writings on the matter to begin with, (but I did mention some of the references rxpell uses), here is a good article from rxpell that sums things up nicely:
http://rxpell.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/a-look-at-the-city-square-short-leet/
This article will help you decide which of our five finalists to vote for. If you get a vote. We do not know for sure, even though HoMalone’s promised us a vote, which would include leaving the gardens as they are. But this is Aberdeen, and the government’s position changes more often than the weather.
(I would love to say I have been out at nice dinners and working my way through the ever-changing Brewdog menu, but for the time being my doctors have me on lockdown, and am forced to live off rice, tofu and yoghurt drinks. Somehow this does not really suit me. Still, I will be back doing the rounds as soon as I can). But now for some definitions.
1. (adjective) fitting, proper, suitable, in accord with acceptable norms.
Am I ever embarrassed by Kate’s telling me that it ‘is not appropriate’ for her to write in the Voice, as we are derogatory about her. Shame-faced, I asked myself what can I learn from her example of what is appropriate behaviour? I came up with a few examples.
What is appropriate:
Thank you Ms Dean – I will indeed learn much from you, and will continue my studies.
And to whom but Aberdeen’s first citizen should I next turn towards to learn about appropriate behaviour: Mr Milne has it nailed. Out of the goodness of his heart, he allowed people to actually comment on his stylish plan for Triple Kirks (the Press & Journal obligingly called the area an ‘eyesore’ in an article. There goes that bothersome blurring of ‘editorial’ and ‘article’ again, which of course is not appropriate).
Those who did comment on the Triple Kirks plans marvelled at the giant glass boxes (never mind the peregrines). At least Milne said as much, claiming the majority loved his ground-breaking design.
(Hmm, if only there were some nearby, empty space that could be converted to parking, the scheme would be even easier to approve – if they could come up with some kind of a plan…). Anyway, those few who objected and left email addresses got a very appropriate follow-up email from a Milne company, which reads along the lines of:
“From: “sales@stewartmilne.com”
“Many thanks for your enquiry. We will forward details and information to you shortly. We’re here to ensure that buying your new home is easy and enjoyable, so if we can help any further, just let us know. Sell Your Home in 5 Days”
Now if I were a sceptical, cynical person, I would ask myself: is writing to people who opposed your plans and offering to get them a new home in an ‘easy and enjoyable’ manner something that could be construed as a bribe? Well, the City says everything is fine, so I guess it is all appropriate. I have dismissed the idea that offering sales help to people who were against you is at all wrong.
I hope this has cleared up what is appropriate and what is not.
2. (verb) – to take by deceit or force that which belongs to another.
See: Union Terrace Gardens, City Garden Project, ACSEF, Donald Trump, Compulsory Purchase Orders.
(noun) custom or activity rooted in the past.
People are funny about their traditions. We are being told by the City Council that painting the Lord Provost’s portrait – and celebrating the glorious event with an expensive party is OK – as it is tradition.
Foxhunting (no, not with golf clubs and tame foxes, Mr Forbes) was a United Kingdom tradition going back hundreds of years; it was deemed cruel and barbaric, and therefore has been made illegal. The Catalonia area of Spain has recently given bullfighting the coup de grace – it is hard to imagine anything more barbaric than bullfighting masquerading as a ‘sport’.
I came under criticism (on Facebook again – I really must stay away from that thing) for saying Spain should consider doing away with bullfighting. (PS – if you really think the bull has a chance, and there is no prolonged torture or pain, and it is a brave matador that fights a bull with only a cape to protect himself, then think again – PETA will put you right).
Someone said I was showing ignorance of Spanish culture and tradition. Their point was that tradition was more important than the animal issues. I say “bull”.
The city could not afford to replace broken windows in schools only a few years ago, but wants to shell out on canapés for its elected officials and the usual suspects to celebrate the fact that its Provost is an oil painting. Too right. Without these traditions, we would start moving forward. And the future is uncertain. It is best to cling to what previous generations did – it is safe (well, maybe).
If we always paid for a portrait, then we had better keep paying for a portrait. We might have to cut a few services, but let us stick to whatever was the more traditional course of action. It is important to bear in mind that all traditions are equal in value and all are good. Perhaps we could bring back ducking witches in the loch? Yes, to question traditions is to question culture and nationalism – and where would be without nationalism?
In my world, it is the 21st Century. The whole world is under different pressures than it was when these wonderful traditions came about. There should be more enlightenment and compassion than brutality and superstition; we have run out of excuses. But then I turn on the news, and realise that I have got it wrong again.
Old Susannah is now out to catch something for dinner, and possibly bash a few enemies over the head with my wooden club. Now where did I leave my bow and arrows?
Next week: hopefully some FOI news, more definitions, and a back-to-school special look at education.
Last week in the first of this two part investigation, Suzanne Kelly described how The City Council and its officials were dealing with the Tullos Hill roe deer cull and tree-planting issues. Part 1 also covered the decades of arson on ‘The Gramps’, the excellent quality of Tullos Hill as it is, local community councils’ opposition to the cull, and the considerable public anger at the City’s refusal to even consider modifying its plans.
The hill itself is a wildlife haven; the very important gorse providing homes to bees and birds. There are fields of wildflowers (the spectacular Dame’s Violets for instance), and it is a recreation area.
This is why our City Council – as a LibDem election pledge – want to turn it into some gargantuan 40,000-tree profit-making (ie lumber-producing) forest.
We now look at other important aspects of this issue, challenge the government to comment, and propose some actions.
‘Kissing is out of fashion when the gorse is not in bloom’ goes an old saying – based on the fact gorse virtually always has blossoms. This is an extremely useful plant for bees. If you’ve not been made aware, bee populations around the world are in serious trouble.
As long as we still want our plants to be pollinated so we keep eating, we are well advised to do all we can to encourage bees. My research leads me to conclude that gorse is far better for bees and several other species than trees are (particularly trees which will be cut down for profit when the Council chooses).
Don’t take my word for the importance of gorse. Do take Dr. Ian Rotherham’s word:-
“Gorse is an incredibly valuable habitat for wildlife – supporting a diversity of invertebrates and many birds and mammals. It provides dense cover plus abundant nesting sites, invertebrate food associated with the gorse, and of course the blaze of flowers during much of the year. Butterflies, bees, hoverflies, spiders, badgers, whinchats, stonechats, yellowhammers, chaffinches, linnets, greenfinches, meadow pipits and skylarks for example, all thrive in gorse-rich areas.
“As the biomass of gorse builds up it loses vigour and beings to die back. If there is a fire then the gorse is reduced to ground level and will quickly regenerate for the next 30-40 years or so. Clearly fire risk can be a problem but not for the gorse or the associated wildlife (except at the immediate time of a conflagration).
“Cyclical cutting of gorse, grazing, and cutting of fire-breaks are positive ways to reduce risk and damage but to maintain what is a rich but often unappreciated wildlife habitat. The establishment of a friends group to watch over the area would also help reduce risk. The gorse in bloom is also a wonderful landscape feature. A plantation wood does not provide a biodiversity resource or a landscape feature to match this. Trees are often planted at the expense of the wildlife habitats and landscape features because of the misconception that they are inherently better for wildlife – which they are not – and because money is available as grants to do this.”
( Dr Rotherham is a Professor of Environmental Geography, Reader in Tourism & Environmental Change, International Research Coordinator, associated with universities around the world. He is editor of several important academic publications including International Journal of Urban Forestry, Journal of Practical Ecology & Conservation, and International Urban Ecology Review )
I would be interested to hear from any City Council officer, ranger or pro -Tullos Hill tree plantation consultant wishing to comment on Dr Rotherham’s statement.
In the meantime, Ian Talboys, Countryside Ranger for Aberdeen wrote to me on 6 June:-
“The amount of gorse on the site will be substantially reduced to make way for the tree planting
which again reduces the risk of wilful fires”.
Why should a countryside ranger particularly be keen to change an ecosystem such as Tullos to a profit-making, lumber-producing forest? Where is the evidence that replacing gorse with saplings and trees will reduce wilful fire risk?
I spoke to a person connected to the countryside services for the Council. They advised me that like virtually every branch of our local government, they are now expected to find income streams and do all they can to make money.
It is not enough that our environment is under threat from over-development, pollution and loss of biodiversity – our environmental conservation activities are supposed to make money for the City. Would our rangers’ time be better served in patrolling the fire-prone areas, educating people and engaging in active conservation, or are we asking them to look for grants such as the tree-planting ones and to make money at all costs?
If I get an answer to this question, I will share it with you. Again, I invite comment from the City.
I still await a reply as to how this timber business is going to be set up, and for a copy of the business plan. Should any of this information ever be forthcoming from our elected officials, I will share it with you. Again, should any City proponents of the scheme like to come forward and (finally) explain how the timber business will work, I invite them to do so.
It has just been announced that despite negotiations with Unions being incomplete, the City has signed an agreement with external consultants to make £120 million worth of budget savings over a five-year period (cost of these consultants has been estimated at between £500k to £600k). Perhaps they will have their own opinion as to the viability of a timber business venture on an arson hotspot which has already resulted in the City returning £43,800 to the Forestry Commission…
In a ten-point complaint I clearly asked for clarification of a £44,000 debt for a failed tree plantation which I had heard of. The City’s Chief Executive Valerie Watts wrote in early June to deny any money was owed.
Proof that this payment was made was given to me almost immediately after Watts’ denial – but as of 21 July,Wattshas not explained the failure to disclose the repayment.
The proof is a letter the Forestry Commission sent to the City earlier this year which was copied to Ian Talboys. The question is whether Watts knew of the letter when she wrote to me or not. Until she explains her answer, the whole planting programme should be put on hold. It is not just returning money for the past failure (we had to pay interest) but the implications for this new planting that need to be considered, which could be significant for the cash-strapped council’s taxpayers.
Watts was made aware of this repayment by me, and possibly earlier by others. What is beyond the pale is that Freedom of information Officers continued for some weeks afterward to advise that no debt was owed. All of the requests I have seen referenced the £44k figure; mine specifically asked for clarification of the matter.
If the City tries to use the excuse that since the debt was paid in March and the questions arrived in June, then that would be the most disingenuous logic coming from Town Hall in memory. I am sure it is beyond the Council’s lowest standard to try and make pretence of using such a childish defence. When we will get the truth is crucial – they must not be allowed to stall this matter until cull season opens. If anyone trying to prevent the cull could ask their elected officials to have these issues addressed and investigated fully as an urgent matter, it will help. I have asked the FOI office to explain whether or not it discovered this letter in its search to answer my question. I have asked it to advise whether or not it made a deliberate decision to not disclose this letter. I await the outcome of the investigation.
Yet another Freedom of Information anomaly exists regarding Grampian Fire.
The previous article covered the problems of arson. Confusion emerges as to the number of fires. There was a FOI request response from Grampian Fire which shows a nominal number of deliberate fires. At the time of writing I await permission to share or reproduce these figures, as they are apparently ‘copyright’. I have officially applied to print them, but cannot do so until Grampian Fire’s officials approve my written request.
However I came across an internet document which shows a rather different, substantially higher number of fires than the FOI request revealed, entitled ‘Grampian Fire and Rescue Service Category 2 – Advancing Community and Citizen Well-being’ . This document states there were over 70 fires for 2006, and claims the figures were going down; it had partial 2008 figures and said only 11 fires started that year. It is worth mentioning that there have been at least half a dozen fires in the Gramps since May of this year. In any event, the paper’s numbers are not the same as the recently supplied figures, which are lower.
I will try to discover an explanation for the discrepancy, and will cover whatever explanation Grampian Fire sends in another article. Both email addresses for the FOI officer and the above paper’s writer are at the address ‘@grampianfrs.org.uk’, which leads me to conclude the same organisation might be responsible for distributing contradictory figures.
I add this to the ever growing list of things I am trying to discover, and yet all the while a cull remains the City’s goal, and the clock is ticking.
Scottish Natural History have been taking great pains to gain media coverage recently (BBC and local press), saying in effect that deer are great, but to stop them being killed in road accidents and over-populating, they have to be ‘managed.’ They launched a consultation, which many animal groups felt had a strong bias towards hunting and culling red deer and roe deer equally. First, what kind of animal are we talking about exactly?
What are roe deer?
Recognition: Small deer, reddish brown in summer, grey in winter. Males have short antlers, erect with no more than three points.
Height: Average height at shoulder 60-75cm (that is less than 3 foot tall). Males slightly larger than females.
Weight: Adults 10-25kg
Lifespan: The maximum age recorded for wild roe is 16 years, but most die before 7 years.
Diet: Their diet is varied and includes buds and leaves of deciduous trees and shrubs, bramble, rose, ivy, herbs, conifers, ferns, heather and grasses.
By permission, the Mammal Society,
http://www.mammal.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&id=228
So in short these tiny creatures, of which we seemingly have 30 on Tullos Hill alone jeopardise a 40,00 tree plantation. (The Council has made absolutely no mention of how they will tackle the weed problem cited by the Forestry Commission as a partial reason for the previous expensive failure – again, I have asked for this information with no reply).
Glasgow has made a strong statement against these types of culls which can be found at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/291204/0089678.pdf and the relevant section starts on page 5.”
Here are some relevant extracts:-
“….collaborative deer management is not necessary for Roe deer in urban environments as there is no scientific justification for this.
2.4 There is no mention of the positive role of wild deer on natural habitats. Large herbivores help to create and retain glades and rides within woodlands, which provide habitat for a range of other species.
2.5 This section of the Bill has the potential to perpetuate and reinforce the perception of deer as pest species. Whilst this will promote the interests of a minority who have a vested interest in deer management principally through culling, it goes against the reason for the inclusion of native wild deer on the Scottish Biodiversity List, Le. the appreciation of these animals by the general public who wish to see them left unharmed.
2.6 Glasgow City Council believes that this section in its present form promotes an unbalanced view of the rationale behind deer management, whilst acknowledging that there is scientific justification for the management of red deer in parts of the Highlands.
Deer in Scotland – General Comments.
2.7 GCC object to the blanket statement that ‘Deer therefore need to be managed … ‘ for the following reasons:
• The terms manage/managed/management are not defined but appear to relate to culling deer, which is not the usual definition of management. This needs to be clarified.
• If the above is the case, then deer do not always require to be culled because in some areas an increase in population size could be beneficial.
•Red Deer and Roe Deer are quite different animals not only in size but also in habits etc. Why are they covered by one piece of legislation and why do they both have to be managed?”
The various animal charities I’ve communicated with all remain against this cull and have their own experts who explain the flaws in the entire premise.
A personal observation. The section of Aberdeen I live in, Torry, has fewer trees on its main streets than any other part of the world I’ve lived in, city or suburb. The streets are however covered with cars and trucks 24/7, and the exhaust fumes have air quality implications.
A few trees would do a good deal to clean the air. It would be costly and difficult to plant and protect them. But it would not be impossible. We know from the Council’s websites that parts of Aberdeen (Wellington Road in particular) have serious air pollution issues. We also know trees help reduce vehicular pollution. In the course of my research I learned that the indigenous fir trees for the Grampian area have been greatly depleted over time – yet there is no plan to replace these native species.
Conclusion: Stop this destructive, unwanted plan now and cancel any deer cull. Plant fewer trees. Plant in other locations
Last week a media contact asked me to supply the statement below, which sums up my conclusions and reflects the opinions of the vast majority of the people I have spoken with:-
The public have in no way given up on stopping the deer cull on Tullos Hill. Tullos is an important and beautiful ecosystem as it is, and the deer population has been stable for many years.
Putting up signs to warn motorists that deer are in the area is sensible; putting 40,000 trees on this arson hotspot is not sensible. Four Community Councils have told the Council they do not want the trees if it means a cull – these elected councils represent thousands of people.
The City had to repay £43,800 for a planting on Tullos that failed due to deer browsing AND weeds. The City initially omitted this when I asked for clarification- and I patiently await sensible answers to this and other questions. The tree planting was a Liberal Democrat election promise – it is amusing that it is this unpopular promise they are so stubborn about keeping.
Finally, Peter Leonard has written to say that the Community Councils don’t understand the issues and they only know what they got from the media. I find his remarks unbelievably patronising and insulting, particularly when it was down to the Council to communicate the details of its scheme in the first place.
The Council kept the deer cull out of the phase 2 public consultation and is now claiming people don’t have the facts. This is wholly unacceptable, and I am pleased that my sources tell me there is a great deal of unrest, with an official calling the situation ‘a hot potato’.
Unfortunately the lack of timely, sensible answers looks to many people as if the City is stalling and hopes to get away with a cull. There will be no cull without repercussions at the ballot box in May.
I am creating a presentation to give to any community council that wants it, particularly aimed at those councils which will have the City’s experts present their side. Direct action is being considered by some animal rights/concern groups.
If you have any feelings one way or the other, then I urge you to contact your elected representatives (you may also wish to contact Scottish Representatives Roseanna Cunningham and Stewart Stevenson who are backing the proposal).
Good luck to the roe deer and the wishes of the people of Aberdeen in the face of our government.
Image Credit: Roe Deer Standing Still © Catalin Pobega | Dreamstime.com
In the first of two parts, Suzanne Kelly offers an update into what is and is not happening on the hill.
There may have not been much about the controversial Tullos Hill Roe Deer Cull in the media of late; therefore it’s time for an update.
The relative quiet in the media is not for lack of investigation, protest and anger on the community’s part.
As for the City and its LibDem councillors and officials, they are either spreading incorrect information (denying the past failure and £44k debt which resulted), or not answering questions at all (I eagerly await overdue answers on a number of fronts).
The question is: are they trying to stall a proper investigation until they start shooting in September? It looks as if stalling might indeed be their strategy.
There are so many outstanding issues, questions and problems with the Tullos Hill deer cull that this article needs to be split into two parts. This part will look at the location chosen for the trees, Community Council’s stances and the small matter of arson.
Next week will cover issues including the SNH, the unanswered Freedom of Information requests and formal complaints, the importance of the gorse-covered hill as it exists (an expert writes), and the curious case of the £43,800 Forestry Commission ‘repayment.’ This repayment Ms Watts either forgot about or didn’t know about when last she wrote to me.
Interestingly, Freedom of Information requests on this point are still being answered that no such debt exists.
Either the council is being very very accurate (the debt was repaid late this March, but it most definitely existed), or someone was keen to keep the repayment quiet. If so, they failed just as they failed in their bid to keep the cull quiet).
Before we get into the details, a small ray of hope: unnamed sources confirm that there is unease within the corridors of power over this ridiculous plan, with officials calling the situation ‘a hot potato’ and a ‘can of worms’. Take heart from that, but please continue reading this article.
If at the end of it you decide you don’t want the cull, then write to your elected officials and Aberdeen City Chief Executive Valerie Watts, making it clear you will vote against anyone in May who has voted for this cull.
See: http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?bcr=1
Deer have lived in relative security (bar the arsonists and Aileen Malone) on Tullos Hill for many decades; they delight the residents of Torry and Kincorth as well as people visiting from further afield.
The hill is a wildlife haven as it is with the very important gorse providing homes to bees and birds, fields of wildflowers (the spectacular Dame’s Violets for instance).
It has bronze age cairns set dramatically on its summit (currently un-obscured by trees), and it is a recreation area. This is why our City Council – as a LibDem election pledge – want to turn it into some gargantuan 40,000-tree profit-making (i.e. lumber-producing) forest.
Of all the Liberal Democrat promises, killing the deer and planting the trees is about the only one in the UK they are adamant about sticking to.
They told the community councils and the public at large what a great thing this forest would be – but as previously demonstrated, they and SNH deliberately sought to keep a cull of the Tullos Hill roe deer secret. Without a cull, there is no money for planting all these trees (although we could have had experts advising us – for free – how to plant trees without culling deer: it just would have cost money). Why then we are insisting on a forest of this size or a forest at all, and why on Tullos Hill?
If we accept without question that trees must be planted because we can get grants for doing so as long as they reach growth targets, then where to put them?
The easily-accessible Loirston Loch greenbelt area has several young trees on it – all in tree protector sleeves (the same sleeves which the SNH November letter tells us are rejected because they have ‘visual impact’ among other reasons – someone at ACC took this decision to reject tree protectors for us all with no recourse to the public or local councils). There was a splendidly suitable area for these trees – but we are putting a football / community stadium on this piece of ground now.
This virtually flat land is easily reached by car (Tullos at present has no parking and is mainly reached by several footpaths), is not on a windswept hill, and is not as remote as Tullos – therefore less desirable to arsonists. It is a largely open field with grasses and some vegetation in very moist, nearly marshy ground.
Loirston was not the only option either. But this is Aberdeen: Tullos Hill is apparently the only choice we have, according to our Council. They are happy to sacrifice greenbelt at Loirston and elsewhere for stadiums, offices and housing – but are adamant that an existing, stable ecosystem must become a forest: and they will not answer us why.
For all the City rangers’ and Grampian Fire’s attempts to be ‘down with the kids’, the arson issue remains the burning question: why put 40,000 young trees on a windswept hill with access issues which is next to settlements and industry when we can’t keep the arsonists out?
Ranger Ian Talboys is at pains to play down the arson issue. In an email to myself, 6 June 2011 he states:
“As the trees to be planted are mainly broadleaved species which do not readily burn in the way gorse does the risk of fire is reduced. The conifers in the scheme will be mixed in with the broadleaved species again reducing the risk of large scale fire damage….. The recent statistics have shown a substantial reduction in wilful fire raising on the site, despite the recent incidents.
“It is however encouraging that the Police have charged a number of youths in connection with these fires as a result of intelligence gained from the local community and following the work we have been doing with the local schools over the last 5 years. In the last couple of years there have been very few fires on Tullos Hill, a total of some 11 fires were reported for 2010 on Kincorth Hill and Tullos Hill combined….”
Mr Talboys also talks about getting rid of the gorse, which:
“reduces the risk of wilful fires”
Gorse is a vital part of the ecosystem, particularly on Tullos Hill which we will look at later. However it is disappointing that the attitude is to get rid of a natural feature which supports wildlife because it is more flammable (allegedly) than trees – rather than to simply stop the arsonists.
Who are the arsonists, and is Talboys right that the fires are decreasing? So far this year there have been at least a dozen fires. Two men aged 27 and 23 are being charged with starting fires on 3 July: so much for the idea of stopping the schoolchildren starting fires, which is the strategy Talboys promotes.
American studies identify half a dozen types of arsonists; these two would fit into the ‘excitement-motivated’ arson category, often men between 18-30. Blaming children was the favourite option; it is now discredited. The Council may wish to do more research on this one.
You may be interested to know that Talboy’s figures are slightly at odds with figures supplied by Grampian Fire. Then again, media reports would seem to say there have been more fires than either of these sources. I would love to tell you what Grampian Fire had to say: but they have qualified that their statistics are subject to copyright and are for personal use and not publication! I await clarification and will report once they explain themselves.
At least someone in power loves Tullos. When the fires were blazing in May of this year, Fraser Burr of Grampian Fire (Risk Reduction) told the BBC:
“It would be a shame to see such a beautiful area of the city, enjoyed by hundreds throughout the year, ruined by wilful fire raising”. – (BBC News 22 May 2011)
I spoke to a New York-based former fire department captain; he seriously disputes Talboy’s contention that young or mature trees are relatively safe from fire. California for one example habitually fights forest fires that are vast in area; the size of the trees makes the fire considerably more dangerous than a few burning gorse bushes. Wind makes the problem far worse.
Fact: Tullos Hill is extremely windy at times. People often need to be evacuated from their homes when the fires rage (also seen in Europe) – who will promise this will not happen here with 40,000 trees virtually on top of residential and industrial areas as Tullos is? My fire-fighter source said ‘there is no magic plant that doesn’t burn’.
He also posed a hypothetical question and asked me why these people are so fixed on planting these trees in this location. I have asked, but I have no answer. He then jokingly said ‘who’s getting kickback?’ We both laughed.
When the truth came out about the secret cull plans, community councils and citizens (in their thousands) condemned the plan and the way the City handled the public ‘phase 2’ consultation. How did your local community council react?
I am writing this piece on the 13th of July. The Minute of the Housing & Environment Committee meeting of May 10 is still not available on the Council’s website a mere 2 months after the fact. It was at this meeting that Andy Finlayson and I had both put in delegations to speak about the deer cull and Tullos Hill, for all the reasons that had emerged since the cull was first brought up.
It was because there was no written report on the deer – only a verbal one which had been requested by Malone – that we were not automatically allowed to speak. Abuse of process springs to mind. In the event, the matter of our delegations was put to a vote and only a handful of councillors supported letting the truth be heard.
I have been waiting to check the accuracy of these Minutes; for one thing I admit I got confused as to whether Andy Finlayson was from Nigg or rather from Cove (which I now understand to be the truth). Finlayson was the other would-be speaker. Maybe after another two months have passed, the Minutes will be published and I can double-check this point.
But take note: in another two months it will be the season for the cull: could our City be deliberately stalling us until it is too late for the deer?
Community Councils are your elected local representatives. The City has a duty to consult with them on local issues – something sadly lacking on this issue, let alone the massive Loirston AFC football ground which will fragment the greenbelt. Nigg CC is very busy with this important issue.
The City is not consulting, and it is certainly not listening. Here are what the Councils are saying – how did yours react?
Kincorth Community Council resolved at its May 2011 meeting:
“Item 10.1 The City Council has agreed to the killing of the deer on Tullos Hill but have stated it will be done as humanely as possible. The Chair asked the Secretary to write indication our abhorrence at this decision”.
Kincorth spokesperson Graham Bennett, quoted in the Press & Journal, 13 May:
“We are all united. We deplore the willingness of the City Council to cull the deer. We all agreed we didn’t want a tree planted for every citizen. These are defenceless animals. We would rather do without the trees and have the deer.”
I spoke to a member of Kincorth CC; they are all outraged and want the hill to remain as it is, with the deer continuing to live there. My contact cites the fact that the ‘phase 2 consultation’ said nothing about the deer cull, yet mentioned rabbit fencing.
This is one of the strongest points of contention – the public and community councils were deliberately kept in the dark about the deer cull. This is proved clearly in the 25 November letter the SNH sent to the City Council, stating the need to ‘manage’ the public over the cull.
It seems SNH are fully aware that culling these animals in general is an issue – but to kill animals in order to protect non-existent trees is ‘abhorrent’. (More about the SNH and its recent deer consultation next week). The word ‘abhorrent’ is also how the Scottish Society for the Protection of Animals and Kincorth Community Council describe this LibDem plan.
Torry Community Council allowed me to speak at its meeting in May on the cull; they had been informed about the trees in some detail – minus the crucial detail of the deer cull.
The 14 members present voted unanimously to condemn the cull and to write to the City to protest the cull and the lack of consultation. Talboys specifically communicated with Torry about the trees, without ever mentioning a deer cull.
To put it mildly, the Council and the residents of Torry are Not Happy.
On 10th May Cove’s Chairman Andy Finlayson attempted to address the Housing & Environment Committee over the cull and all the issues which had arisen (lack of consultation with CCs, no reference made in the public consultation documents, etc.).
Aileen Malone initially referred to him as the ‘gentleman from Cove Community Centre’ as opposed to his status as duly-elected Council member. On the technicality of there being no written report on the deer – only a verbal one – Cove’s representative was unable to raise the many points which the Council had kept out of the public domain which were relevant to the tree scheme.
“We are totally against it, basically… the community council is unanimous and everyone in the area we speak to is against it…the message is, stuff the trees – we would rather have the deer.” – Andy Finlayson, Chair, Cove & Altens CC, Press & Journal 13 May 2011
“I think the majority of the Community Council are against it (the cull)” – James Brownhill, Nigg CC – Press & Journal, 13 May 2011
Nigg is committed to preserving its greenbelt land as its actions and its website attest. It is doing all it can to stop the ridiculous AFC stadium plans which will see a 21,000 seat stadium plunked in the middle of the greenbelt to its permanent injury. A year ago, the Nigg Community Council April Minutes had this entry:
“Lochinch Visitors Centre Deer- thanks to activity of Cllr Cooney, Nigg CC, Jenny Gall and Vivienne McCulloch, deer had been saved from culling and will live out their lives in their current (but reduced) enclosure.”
Before the furore broke out over Tullos Hill, Councillor Neil Cooney and others from Nigg were already going to bat against needless slaughter of our indigenous animals when tame deer were earmarked for needless slaughter.
One year later at its 14 April 2011 meeting, Nigg CC resolved:
“Proposed Deer Cull Tullos Hill – Majority against proposal. Lack of deer management policy holding up planting of trees under ‘tree for every citizen’ scheme.”
Nigg’s Council met again on 12 May 2011 after the Housing Committee’s undemocratic debacle over the deer and would-be speakers. Nigg’s minutes read:
“Proposed Deer Cull Tullos Hill. Decision to cull deer city-wide approved by ACC Councillors. SNH recommended cull to save deer from starvation. Nigg CC still not happy with this decision”.
I disagree with the comment about starvation, and wonder if SNH have actually said the deer at Tullos will starve – they are in no present danger of that as things stand. But this is a very minor point concerning the minutes. When it comes to accuracy in Minute taking, Cults has managed to create an interesting document indeed.
I spoke to Cults Bieldside Milltimber Community Council on 26 May where Aileen Malone and I finally had the debate she had so far resisted (again, she would not let me speak to the Housing committee which she convenes; and she was too busy one Sunday morning in May to spare 20 minutes to debate the issue with me on Northsound).
In my initial request to speak to Cults, I sent them newspaper cuttings that Torry, Kincorth, Nigg and Cove & Altens Community Councils were opposed to the scheme, as well as the Scottish SPCA. I sent them articles on the SNH letter which shows the City wanted to keep the cull quiet. In these circumstances I was asking Cults CC to let me address its May meeting and specifically to follow suit.
The community council meeting that ensued was interesting (and heated) on several points. Mike Shepherd of Friends of Union Terrace Gardens was there to discuss the future of the gardens, and Aileen Malone stated that there would definitely be a public vote on whether to go ahead with any scheme for Union Terrace Gardens.
At my request she repeated this was the truth, and that the only question unresolved was whether residents in the shire as well as the city would get a vote.
I wrote an article on this Cults BM CC meeting. I wrote it that night and the next day with my own shorthand notes taken on the night (amongst other things, I have been a secretary minuting meetings for some 25 years, and like to think I have some skill and experience in this area).
My notes reflect that Cults BM CC was going to write to Aberdeen City Council to express a position opposed to the Tullos Cull; I asked the secretary on the night if I could have a copy of any letter they sent; the secretary agreed.
See: you’re-shooting-yourself-in-the-foot-cults-cc-tells-malone
This is what came out in the Cults BM CC Minutes for that meeting:
“Tullos Hill Deer Cull (Peter Reiss)
The Community Council had been made aware of resentment in parts of the city towards the plans to cull some of the local roe deer, seemingly triggered by the need to limit damage to new trees to be planted on Tullos Hill. Suzanne Kelly a Torry resident had written to CBMCC to ask if the CC would take a position on this matter.
In discussion the following points were made:
– The tree planting drive is an election commitment of the current LibDem administration
– Funding from EU and other sources requires best practice and best value for money.
– Due to problems with earlier plantings, City will not get any more funding for tree planting unless a robust roe deer management programme is in place,
– Deer have no natural predators in Scotland. Aberdeenshire, Moray and private estates have a deer cull policy in place. Aberdeen City has management programmes for several other wild animals – e.g., rabbits – but not one for deer.
– A management programme that includes an annual deer cull of about 30 animals has been agreed recently by the City’s Environment Committee. This is a city wide programme but will help to reduce damage to new plantings in Tullos where some 10 to 15 deer will be culled.
– Objectors say that there has been insufficient consultation on this programme. They would prefer fencing or other positive tree protection rather than killing deer. They are extremely unhappy about the Committee’s request to them to raise £225 000 for 10 years deer fencing as there is no council money to pay for that alternative.
The CC resolved that the deer culling policy appears to be a separate issue not just related to the planting of trees.
Post –meeting note: City tree specialists have been invited to speak in the next community council meeting.”
(Cults Bieldside Milltimber Community Council Minute 26 May 2011)
I have added italics to the excerpt above where the minutes have gone back to repeating verbatim the City Council’s double-speak, sweeping statements about deer culls in general. Readers of previous stories or Council documents will find a familiar ring to the Cults minutes.
General tree planting issues aside, the Tullos Hill deer have survived in the existing ecosystem – an ecosystem enjoyed by the public as well which the neighbouring Community Councils have clearly said they want kept as is.
I have also italicised the ‘post meeting note’ wherein someone has invited tree specialists to speak at the June meeting (I would have gone to that had I been informed or had I seen these May minutes in time). So, without any counterpoint some ‘tree experts’ were called in to explain the City’s perspective on killing deer and planting trees. Again, who was there to explain all of the issues specific to Tullos?
I will look at those minutes when they are issued.
It now transpires that Peter Leonard, council officer, is deploying council tree experts to speak to the community councils. This is what Leonard has to say (I have put the particularly objectionable phrases in bold) in a Freedom of Information Request answer:
“The Community Councils who have objected have not been in possession of the full picture of the project, some who have no planting areas within their areas will have had no information about the project from the team delivering the project as there was no requirement to consult on a project that was not within their area.
“Officers from Housing and Environment have offered to attend the community councils who have written in opposing the cull (Kincorth & Leggart and Cults Bieldside and Milltimber, Cove and Altens Community Councils) to present the full picture about The Tree for Every Citizen Project including the deer management proposals so they can make an informed decision.
“To date any decision they will have made will have been based on the information published in the media which has not given the full and balanced picture. Officers will be prepared to undertake similar presentations to other community councils covering areas where there are sites proposed for tree planting if invited.”
Personally, I find his comments about the community councils’ decision-making process extremely patronising: how does he know where these elected groups got information from and why does he assume it is only from the media? If people are not in full possession of all the facts this is the Council’s fault – they launched the ‘phase 2 consultation’ over six months ago, and it was a very flawed document. I certainly have been asking for information since then, largely without any real answer.
There is currently no plantation of young trees on Tullos requiring a cull. The whole point is that there do not need to be this number of trees there, and the local community councils representing some 25,000 people said they do not want the trees.
These two reasons alone should be enough to stop your plans. But if this is not enough for you, then we will examine your past planting failure and your cavalier attitude towards facts as well as other issues next week.
Do feel free to weigh in – remember, Aberdeen Voice wants articles from all points of view. Nothing is stopping you from making your point.
Old Susannah tries to get her head around the Council’s secrecy and finds them much more transparent than they had thought they were. By Suzanne Kelly.
Firstly, I trust we are all excited about the discovery of a giant wombat’s fossil in Australia!
This lumbering, hulking, ungainly creature could not move with the times, and so faded into history. Its great big head only had a pea-sized brain which was useful only for more primitive functioning. It spent its time hoarding nuts and drinking at its favourite watering holes.
Any relation to Councillors K ♦♦♦ D♦♦♦ or N♦♦♦ F ♦♦♦♦♦♦ is curiously coincidental.
While I may have spent most of this past week enjoying the sun as well as well as a pleasant afternoon or two in Brewdog, I’ve not been oblivious to the things that the City Council, local institutions and mainstream press want me to be oblivious to. While I enjoyed champagne and plenty of Pimms with my friends ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ and ♦♦♦♦♦♦ in the great outdoors, I’ve been informed of a few developments.
Despite the summer sun, there are shadowy figures behind the scenes, keeping secrets, denying facts, and trying (with little success) to keep people and stories quiet – some innocent, some not so innocent.
‘No news is good news’ – so the saying goes, but whoever came up with this particular phrase probably had too much of Brewdog’s ‘Sink The Bismarck’ ultra-strong beer. Here in Aberdeen ‘no news’ seems to mean the local, mainstream press have decided to play things down. So – listen very carefully, I will say this only once…
Redacted: (adjective) – obscured, covered up, deleted, censored.
Some months ago, I attended a special meeting of Torry Community Council at which the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens presented their case, and a very nice lady named Jan represented ACC (Gordon McIntosh had been invited, but was having dinner instead). Jan told us how everything was going to be wonderful, and how the entire matter was going to be handled ‘in a transparent manner’.
In fact, she used the word ‘transparent’ half a dozen times. I left the meeting with a warm, fuzzy feeling that if something were going on about the gardens, it would all be transparent. What a relief.
How very strange it was then to open up a P&J this week and find our new Council Leader McCaig asking why the minutes of one of the Garden-related groups (and there are many I can assure you) has been redacted. Over the weekend I’d emailed him asking why the text had been redacted; he’s not slow off the mark, our Mr McCaig.
But what group is this redacting its papers? It’s the City Gardens Project Monitoring Group. What do they do? According to the City’s website,
“The role of the Project Monitoring Group is to oversee the City Garden project’s progress and ensure that Council’s interests, and that of the majority of Aberdeen citizens, are protected as the project
progresses”.
I take it that makes it quite clear why they must act in secret. It’s not a question of whether or not something will be done with the gardens – they are overseeing progress. So – the Council’s interests are not the same as the interests of Aberdeen citizens (minority or majority). In all my years I never would have guessed that. Perhaps they should have redacted this mission statement as well.
Who is in this group? Who attends the meetings? If you go to the city’s website, you can download the minutes and reports – where you will see that all the names of attendees have been blacked out, or in council-speak ‘redacted’, together with lots of text.
The City was trying to keep this top secret information a closely guarded secret. Perhaps the Monitoring Group is made up of MI6, the CIA, Lord Lucan and Spiderman? Whoever it is, I bet they have a dual identity, a good cover story – and probably a costume with a cape. I hear they all meet at midnight and each have limos with blacked-out windows.
From now on I hear that anyone in a Council committee which discusses Union Terrace Gardens will sign the Official Secrets Act, be security-vetted, be given a cover identity and undergo survival and torture training.
Mr McCaig has no recollection of agreeing to this group’s identity being protected, and he wants some answers. Let’s hope he gets them. Why on earth would this be secret, and what do they wish to hide? Answers on a postcard please (preferably in a secret code).
Alas for our poor Council: their secrets are out. That nice Danny Law over at STV has announced that a simple bit of cutting and pasting reveals all. Visit STV for further information.
You might also want to visit the (excellent) blogspot Other Aberdeen:-
http://otheraberdeen.blogspot.com/
It’s hard to imagine that the City didn’t give due care and attention to this life-or-death matter of who’s going to meetings and what they are saying about our gardens. I am stunned. From now on I hear that anyone in a Council committee which discusses Union Terrace Gardens will sign the Official Secrets Act, be security-vetted, be given a cover identity and undergo survival and torture training.
For my part, one of my trusted sources told me how to spy at the hidden text a while ago, and I was sworn to secrecy – which I kept. My secret hope was that the Council would continue to keep thinking it had successfully blacked out text that could actually be read. We could have been onto a winner with this one.
My sympathies to the Garden Monitoring Group at this unfortunate point in time, and in particular to one of those in the group: our very own old friend, Ms Aileen HoMalone. Not only is the debacle an embarrassment in itself, but my very own spies tell me that since the balance of power shift, this and other committees will be re-arranged over the summer, shedding a few LibDems in favour of SNP councillors along the way.
Gag:
1. noun – a joke or stunt designed to cause laughter or possibly embarrassment.
2. Verb – to make another remain silent via coercion or force.
A gag can be a stupid remark, like John Stewart’s saying Aberdeen needs a monorail, or a stunt — like holding a design competition for ‘transforming’ a cherished garden into a car park/mall. On the more sinister side of the coin, this week both Aberdeen City Council and Robert Gordon University stand accused of gagging their staff.
Now, obviously the opinion of staff at ACC is held in the highest esteem by management, and at an institution of higher learning such as RGU, nothing can be held more important than the right to free expression and intellectual debate. There is absolutely nothing ‘Big Brother’ about Aberdeen City Council rounding up four of its less-than-grateful staff as it did this week to tell them off.
What had the four done? They said mean things about the City and their bosses on something called ‘Facebook’, which apparently all the young people are using. I hope these four ingrates have apologised for having opinions. I do know that they have been issued with a set of guidelines as to what they can or can’t say. Sounds like a great move.
In fact, back when the cuts were being proposed in 2008, the City very wisely told its staff that they should in no way protest against the City’s school and service closures. Many of them did so anyway. You might think such people are brave in standing up for education and health services, but you must remember, when you take a job for the City, you lose all your human rights. Fair trade, I’d say.
I hope these four people are at home right now, reading their new behaviour guidelines and composing letters of apology. I’d certainly hate to think they’d be sending me copies of the city’s newest Kafkaesque policies. Or even worse – they might be creating anonymous Facebook identities so they can continue to keep us posted with City developments and dark doings.
As to that bastion of higher education, Robert Gordon University: they are also gagging for it. You may have seen the news that RGU want the Trade Unions to go away and stop bothering them.
This institution of higher learning has announced that since the unions are now ‘smaller’, they shouldn’t have to recognise them at all. Quite right. Just because the University has shed a few jobs and has a few less people, there is no reason the unions should have shrunk as well. Staff and educators alike are overjoyed by this move on RGU’s part, as they won’t have to go to any more tedious union meetings.
The staff won’t publicly say how happy they are, because RGU is, according to STV “accused of ‘gagging’ staff as dozens protest over de-recognition decision”. I know staff who have been asked to take on more work with no pay, who have had pensions cut, and who work weekends with no extra money to show for it. I’m sure union representation is the furthest thing from their minds.
RGU wanted the whole episode to be treated as Top Secret: staff were told not to discuss these special Trump security arrangements
It might be worth mentioning that RGU held its staff’s safety particularly important during Donald Trump’s visit for his honorary degree. RGU management were so concerned about the safety of its people who would be in the same building as ‘the Donald’ that they let Trump’s private security people search bags, set up security checks, and made sure no one left the building until the great man himself had gone.
Some people say that their mobile phones were looked at, and they weren’t allowed to take any photos (which would have been the first thing on my mind), but this remains unconfirmed.
Those who did get in touch told me that RGU wanted the whole episode to be treated as Top Secret: staff were told not to discuss these special Trump security arrangements. I would be happy for the RGU administration to confirm or deny that private, American security was given power over its staff.
Maybe they could have done what Robert Gordon’s College did, and simply lock any bothersome people up in cupboards (congratulations to Ms Michie for winning her case against the College where she was indeed locked in a cupboard. I await news of the dismissal of the person who did this, but it hasn’t appeared yet).
News Blackout: (modern English phrase) – to deliberately ignore or censor news events. (See also ‘P&J’)
The local press simply don’t have the time and space to tell you the entire goings on. The P&J may have covered the story of the City Council’s ‘redacting’ text (see below), as Cllr McCaig came forward with the story.
However, if you put ‘Robert Gordon University’ into the Press & Journal’s online search feature, you’ll see a collection of innocent PR stories about boat races and an RGU student appearing in something called ‘Glee’ (whatever that is). No RGU bashing in the P&J; they don’t want to upset that nice Mr Wood and his friends. No word of gagging staff or staff being kettled by American private scurity.
You might also search the P&J website for the story of guitar hero Richard Thompson’s honorary degree from Aberdeen University granted on the 5th July (congratulations by the way).
I’ll give you that Richard Thompson is no Donald Trump (who got his degree from Ian Wood’s RGU for services to money). Thompson has only enjoyed a successful international musical career since the 1960s, released award-winning albums, and made a particularly important collection, ‘1000 years of popular music’. I doubt the man even has his own jet.
Don’t bother searching for news of his honorary degree award in the local rags – it’s not there.
Just as Anthony Baxter never got any newspaper coverage for his documentary ‘you’ve been trumped’ about Trump and the Menie Estate (it was held over twice and had unprecedented demand at the Belmont), the local press are making life easier for us by deciding what’s newsworthy and what isn’t.
I for one am far more interested in petty burglaries, minor football matches and cute baby photo competitions than the workings of secrecy in local government and the schemes of our local millionaires.
It is the editors at the local papers who decide what goes in (or possibly a few of the city’s richercitizens), not the reporters.
At least we don’t have a ‘News of the World’ situation. Several newspapers stand accused of hacking mobile phone conversations – of murder victims and their families. Potential evidence has been lost and Milly Dowler’s family wrongly believed she might still have been alive since her voicemail was being accessed. If you can think of anything lower than this, don’t let me know.
PS – the Murdoch Empire isclosing the News of the World after Sunday! Result! However, Murdoch is looking to take over BskyB completely. If you somehow think this might lead to a monopoly over news coverage, speak now.
RGU, millionaires, the future of our Gardens, quangos, dodgy deals, secret deer cull plans: somewhere the truth is out there. Just don’t hold your breath waiting for it.
Speaking of holding your breath, I’d best go close the windows. The wind must have changed, and the scent drifting through my open windows in Torry is decidedly not roses and violets. Old Susannah is off for a short but much needed holiday. I am going to turn 50 on ♦♦♦♦♦♦ and will fly to ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ on ♦♦♦♦♦ and will stay with ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ where I hope very much to see ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦My best wishes to ♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦.
Voice’s Old Susannah casts her eye over recent events, stories, and terms and phrases familiar as well as freshly ‘spun’, which will be forever etched in the consciousness of the people of Aberdeen and the Northeast.
Old Susannah is still reeling from the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens Ceilidh held last Friday night at the Hilton Treetops. The ‘vocal minority’ as the Council likes to call the Friends was certainly vocal on the night, and the excellent Ceilidh band was ‘vibrant and dynamic’ – so much so that we upset the party in the next room, which happened to be Aberdeen Football Club!
A red-faced man from AFC was ever so slightly angry and spent his entire night yelling at the hotel staff that; ‘he had spent a lot of money’, and ‘’didn’t expect to hear a band’ during his event.
Actually, I could barely hear the band over this refined gentleman for most of the night. He was obviously very important, because he kept saying who he was.
Eventually many of us took our drinks out of our room and sat on sofas watching his endless tirade. If AFC players had his stamina, then there would be more silverware in their trophy cabinet. I can only hope we have not inconvenienced Mr Milne himself.
Anyway, the Friends raised lots of money; Anne Begg made a moving speech and everyone (except the AFC man) had a fantastic night.
On Sunday I took advantage of the opportunity to watch ‘you’ve been trumped’ again.
Anthony Baxter did another Q&A session and was joined by Menie resident, Susan Munroe. The giant mound of earth and sand those nice Trump people left next to her house, (no doubt for a very important reason) is having a wonderful effect on her garden and her car. The garden is dying (so less work for her to tend it) and the car is clogged with sand (so that means less C02 emissions – another result).
The Q&A session wound up in the Belmont’s bar and continued for quite some time. Anthony is looking forward to his New York film premier, as you might well expect.
I suspect in reality he’s just hoping Trump will show up and bring his lovely young wife Melania with him – I’m sure Anthony is hoping for an introduction. Then again, I may be wrong about that. Anthony definitely sends his thanks to the Belmont and the people in Aberdeen who have turned out for the film.
But the real story of this past week was the rise of 26 year-old Callum McCaig, now installed as the new leader of Aberdeen City Council. It is pointless to make jokes about his youth; he is bringing his year of experience to the job. Rumours that he wants to turn Union Terrace Gardens into a skateboard park are (so far) unfounded.
I am actually going to give him the benefit of the doubt for the present. To be honest, when I was 26 my interests lay in other directions, but the less said about that the better. He says he wants to listen to what the people are saying. Is it possible he is embracing….
(modern English phrase) involvement of a group of people in decision-making processes.
If you read the many wonderful booklets and reports the City and its army of quangos and consultants have written over the past 10 years (well, a girl has to have a hobby), you will realise what lengths the City has gone to in its quest to ensure we are all given a voice in planning. The City might not actually listen to that voice (viz Union Terrace Gardens, the Tullos Hill Deer Cull, school closures, etc etc). – but it’s awfully nice of them to give us a voice all the same. To quote from some of their literature, here is what the city kindly does with us:-
Effective Community Engagement means:
The ‘Inclusive Design’ implementation has long been a personal favourite. I don’t understand what this phrase means in the slightest but it certainly sounds both important and beneficial. Please feel free to send me some examples of Inclusive Design the City has put in place.
I could be forgiven for thinking that in its haste to improve our lives; the City might have forgotten these principles on a few occasions. Let’s look at these points again as applied to the Tullos Hill and other current situations (my comments are in bluish):-
I don’t remember the part when the City told us a deer cull was coming for their tree programme, but I do remember they and SNH wanted to keep the cull quiet.
The public were allowed to comment on the tree planting until the end of January. This was the ‘phase 2 consultation’. However, once we found out that the cull was part of this phase 2 plan and that it had been kept secret, we were told we could not share our opinions. That nice Ms Aileen Malone and other Lib Dems refused to let me and the Nigg Community Council representative address the May Housing Committee with this new information: because she had only asked for a verbal report on the cull, not a written one.
Democracy in action! Or is that Democracy inaction? You could be forgiven for thinking it was a sneaky, underhanded, undemocratic ploy on (HoMalone’s) part– but if the City says it has systems in place for public opinion sharing then who are we to question it?
The deer campaigners keep asking why the cull was kept secret, why we can’t have non-lethal measures, why the trees have to be there at all. The Council either ignore these questions, or keep repeating that a cull ‘…is standard practice for maintaining woodlands throughout Scotland.’ It doesn’t seem to matter much that there is no woodland on the hill at present, just the deer.
Again, Inclusive Design is fantastic. This is being shown to great effect in the ongoing Union Terrace Gardens saga. The inclusivity seems a bit limited to a few millionaires, ACSEF and Scottish Enterprise, but hey ho.
I have to say I find the planning system very very transparent: I can see straight through it when it comes to Union Terrace Gardens, Loirston Loch, and Tullos Hill.
Fantastic! Four Community Councils at least have condemned the cull and its handling. Two thousand five hundred local people signed petitions against it. And what does the City’s Chief Executive say?
It says that this only represents a small number of people.
It seems inclusion doesn’t mean including groups of only a few thousand members. I’ll get the hang of who does and doesn’t get included yet.
Now that we have seen how Community Engagement works, I hope we can all appreciate just how important our opinions as taxpayers and residents are to our City.
Maybe this is one engagement that should be broken off.
(adjective) description of a style of interior layout, particularly in an office situation, characterised by the lack of walls.
The idea was to create an open area where information would free-flow. The reality however is that people in such areas have no privacy and are under pressure to conform. Most companies are getting rid of such uncomfortable, noisy interior layouts. But not our City.
Inside the new Marischal College, aesthetic sensibility rules OK.
Staff who were lucky enough to be moved to this open plan nirvana had been told they could bring a maximum of two packing crates of their files / work with them – and one of those crates was for their computer (unless a new machine had been laid on). Thankfully architectural and interior design principles will continue to guide how things operate – staff cannot have any personal mementos or – heaven forbid – plants on their desks!
What would it look like if people could have their desk look the way they wanted? Chaos would ensue and things would not look as uniform as a factory. There is a horrible fear that someone will spill something on the new carpets.
I am sure our 65 million pound wonder building won’t have any acoustic problems; no doubt there are acoustic tiles and such in place. Since shouting, swearing and screaming are rarely heard in the City’s hallowed halls, I’m sure everyone will get on in the new office just fine.
Other staff members are being moved around from building to building; it certainly keeps things lively.
Next week: Definitions, Deer info, and I attempt to contact Neil Fletcher again with a civil question.