Sir Ian Wood Archives - Page 10 of 14

The Briefing

Aberdeen City, Articles, Creative Writing, Featured, Opinion, Satire and Humour No Responses »

May 202011

Alan Gatt presents a transcript of a familiar, fictional, factual, farcical meeting which never happened, but might happen, or possibly already has – or may even be in progress at this very moment in time.

Good afternoon everyone.

All cleared print ID? Yes. If you could leave all your mobile gadgets – cameras, body-mounted vid-capture devices, smartcells, enhanced biros etcetera with Judy at the thumb-print-in desk please. And step through the magnetoarch… nobody got an old-fashioned metallic hip replacement – ha ha – no? Good. Thanks.

Everybody through OK? No anomalous readings, Judy? No? Good. If you could all find a seat – is there enough room? The room is quite small, em… sorry about that, but the EM suppression means that it has to be. Everyone got a seat now? Good.

Colleagues, on behalf of us all at the Trans-Conjectural Proposals Instigation Trust thank you for taking the time out of your energetic schedules to attend this brief stakeholder update presentation at this key watershed time for our iconic project. And yes, welcome along today to the splendid white-room facilities of the Querulant Suite at this new Idée Fixe Conference Centre.

We thank our hosts for the provision of these splendid facilities, not only for this windowless and unrecordable environment – just the thing! – but also for their reasonably-priced and exemplary underground car-park with its innovative numberplate and face-recognition technology demonstrator. All got your PINcards? Some of you have the subcutaneous upgrades, eh? Heh-heh. Good. Shouldn’t talk too much about car-parks, though.

To business…

You’ll all be familiar with the surprisingly rapid progress of our most recent Trans-Conjectural Proposal which has advanced in an inspirational and iconic fashion. Now is the time for us to transform this project into what we can now call a Global Trans-Conjectural Context-Framing Opportunity. To deliver this transformative, em, transformation, we have developed a delivery plan which will champion and shepherd this agenda. Stepping up to the plate on an interlinked basis, this plan is assured of delivering the appearance of three-hundred-and-sixty degree participation models within our context.

Our overarching management strategy will be driving forward our key activity delivery and measurement plan. The delivery plan will be in the form of an inspirational yet logical legal-entity action-plan vehicle which progresses up-front objectives emerging through this unique window of opportunity towards the delivery of our most ambitious and foremost logical key priorities. It safeguards the potential for a distinct opinionscaping context-framing outlook and will greenlight fund-channeling linkages into an entirely new dynamic.

A strategically central numbers game will provide a fundamental plank to access innovative fund sources underpinned by this transformational drive to manage ownership and own management of this delivery plan.

In due course, this special purpose vehicle will be enhanced and reinvigorated.

This development strategy is shared by key players and the uplift provided by the delivery plan mechanism is central to its delivery; it will unlock a more attractive, safer and better connected win-win managementscape and target-rich investmentscape for the key stakeholders here today.

And so contracts for community engagement initiatives will soon be in place, delivering on a range of public-relations improvements under the auspices of our best-practice masterplan which we outlined at the last presentation. These new community engagement contracts will provide us with the ideal public-realm participation management solution for the provision of the required consent-manufacturing services via this special purpose vehicle.

In due course, this special purpose vehicle will be enhanced and reinvigorated. This is expected to be fully available and framework-compliant within the context-framing consent-manufacturing mindscape which we have already achieved, all the while maximising shareholder value… Oh! Thank-you, no… em… yes, thank-you. Applause isn’t necessary – no, ha-ha! Thanks.

…Where was I? Ah yes… The continual securing of this self-referencing self-certified procedural approval feedback mechanism will unlock further yet imaginative, bigger, brighter and iconic leadership obscurantism.

This opportunity to shape the future with self-referencing enriched vitality is truly strategic, truly innovative and the radical transformation will not only provide fascinating narcissistic appeal within our own little circle of friends – ha ha – but also wider heritage compliance lipservice services outwith it. Inspirational inclusion misdirection initiatives when appropriate via incremental rearward-facing commitments once progressed will create the appearance of a real iconic international buzz.

our established undertaking of prioritising strategy themes and status updates will continue towards the feedback-enabled enhancement of project engagement resources

In conclusion, then, when we look back on what has been achieved so far in the shaping of the civic mindscape, the manipulation of the investment opportunityscape and the creation of a public opinionscape which is largely characterised by confusion if not ennui, we can look back on an approach – a resource – which we will continue to leverage towards the achievement of ever more enhanced shareholder value and stakeholder satisfaction.

So long as key deliverables are progressed in accordance with opportunities within the supply chain to anchor our central objectives with respect to this clear strategy, our established undertaking of prioritising strategy themes and status updates will continue towards the feedback-enabled enhancement of project engagement resources. This provides both measurable internal accountability and vital external obfuscation services.

The vision for this exciting journey is an innovative yet highly robust process which every stakeholder here will enjoy participating in. Every stakeholder here today is part of the process. The process is the future and the future is the process. We are the future. This is a very real possibility. It is within our grasp, we are nearly there. With your continued support and with the compliance and consent we have already engineered, rates of return much higher than those available in any other investmentscape will be assured. Thank you all.

…Ha-ha, thanks, yes, thank-you. Too kind… too kind. Thanks.

…Thank you for your time today. Questions will not be necessary. And now I think Judy’s got some special drinks and nibbles ready for us in the Dependency Suite… if you’d like to go through… please… thanks…

The Election – The UTG Effect

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

May 122011

By Dave Watt.

Having looked at the election results from all over Scotland, May the 5th was an SNP landslide only moderated by list system which prevented them from getting even more seats.
New Labour were beaten out of sight, the treacherous Nick Clegg’s Lib-Dems were flung into a deserved oblivion and their Tory bedmates got their usual seeing to from the Scottish electorate and only the list system got them into double figures.

Huge constituency swings ranging from a national average of 12.5 % to peaks of around 20% paved the way for a long awaited referendum on Scottish independence and brought a ubiquitous bright new glow to the Scottish political scene.

Well, almost everywhere. In one particular constituency the swing was much, much smaller. Which constituency? Why, Aberdeen Central.

Aberdeen Central was a key marginal in the election – particularly as the constituency borders had been changed leaving Lewis McDonald (Labour) with a notional 300 or so majority over the SNP’s Kevin Stewart – his main challenger in the constituency. The final vote was pretty close with Kevin Stewart running out the winner with 10,058 votes to Lewis MacDonald’s 9441. This majority of 617 represented a miniscule swing of 0.5% from Labour to the SNP. Easily the smallest SNP constituency swing of the night over the whole of Scotland and one in which the Labour vote actually went UP by 8.6% which didn’t happen in many constituencies.

So why did Aberdeen Central buck such a huge national trend?

The short answer to this is the ongoing UTG controversy and Kevin Stewart’s role in the controversy which is seen by many people as little more than a cheerleader for Sir Ian Wood’s vanity project.

Last week I spoke to several people I knew who were undergoing a crisis of conscience whereby they although were very much in favour of an independent Scotland but were struggling to bring themselves to vote for what one of them obligingly referred to as ‘Woody’s f**king sock puppet’.

Obviously, bearing in mind the result, some of them did vote for the ‘f**king sock puppet’ whereas others didn’t vote or voted for Lewis MacDonald. Either way, the vote for Aberdeen Central was extremely close and, if it had been repeated nationally I think the SNP would have definitely struggled for an outright majority in the Parliament. Realistically, it was only the huge SNP national vote which got the rather unpopular* Mr Stewart down to Edinburgh.

So what does this say about the UTG controversy?

Basically, any councillor still hawking the Garden Square Project round Aberdeen over the next twelve months can expect to get his/her well-worn backside seriously kicked when the Council Elections roll round next May when the national question won’t come into play and it will all just be down to local politics.

* Mr Stewart showed his strange notion of winning hearts and minds a couple of Saturdays before the election when he was outside Marks and Spencer jabbing his finger forcefully and snarling into the face of an elderly lady who had declared her support for UTG. A long term friend of mine (of Italian origin) who intimated, on seeing this, that he had rather more than half a mind to ‘deck the b*stard’ was fortunately persuaded to desist.

A Referendum For The City Square Project?

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

May 122011

By Mike Shepherd.

Alex Salmond has suggested that the way forward for the City Square Project would be to hold a public referendum on the issue. The First Minister gave a question and answer session at Pittodrie Stadium the week of the Scottish parliamentary election.

He was asked why the result of the public consultation on the city square had been ignored given that it had been funded by Scottish Enterprise, part of the Scottish Government.

He replied that once the final design for the city square had been picked, then a public referendum by ballot could be held. Keeping Union Terrace Gardens as they are would be one of the voting options. He stressed that this was his opinion only and he wouldn’t guarantee that it would become policy.

There was surprisingly little publicity on this statement. A Press and Journal reporter was present at the meeting yet the comment was not written up for the newspaper. A few days later it was mentioned in a small paragraph in the Evening Express.

Would a referendum on the city square be a good thing or a bad thing? My opinion is that it would certainly be an advance on what is currently proposed; that is, the public scrutinise and comment on 5-7 designs for a modern city square, the city square board pick the final design and keeping the Gardens would not be an option at this stage.

A referendum would go some way to salving the poisonous feelings in Aberdeen over the ignored consultation and the manner by which the city square has been forced through by local businessmen and politicians in the face of hostile public opposition.

However (and it is a big however), can anyone be trusted to run a referendum after what happened with the public consultation on the city square? This was so badly handled that the use of the word ‘consultation’ now has connotations of a total breakdown in public confidence with local government.

If a referendum were to be run on the City Square / Union Terrace Gardens issue it would have to be credible and worthy of public trust. It would also have to avoid the mistakes of the public consultation. These are the issues:

The result would have to be binding: The public were told that our support was needed for the City Square Project to go ahead. A majority of 1,270 said no and this was then ignored.

The ballot would have to be unbiased: The City Square poll was embedded in marketing material promoting the project. The header for the page containing the poll prompted the public with these words:

“Have Your Say: We believe Aberdeen needs a large, vibrant, cultural and civic space and gardens in the heart of the city for today and for future generations.”

The ballot would have to be run independently: The public consultation was funded by the organisation promoting the city square and run by the PR group Weber Shandwick on their behalf. The brief for the consultation make it clear that the PR company was monitoring the consultation on a daily basis and providing regular reports to a working group which included Sir Ian Wood’s representative. Weber Shandwick were obliged to provide these reports to the working group;

“acting on and incorporating their feedback where appropriate”.

The organisers also screened and analysed the final results of the consultation.

The ballot would have to be restricted to Aberdeen citizens: The public consultation was open to anyone who wanted to vote in it, with the organisers keen to get the shire involved too. The Gardens are a public amenity for Aberdonians and the upkeep is paid for by our council tax. Someone in Aberdeen is likely to be much more concerned about their public amenity value than say someone in Fraserburgh. On the other hand, someone in Fraserburgh could be more easily persuaded that the project has implications for regional economic regeneration than somebody who uses the park in Aberdeen.

A public referendum would not be a level playing field. One side would have the major levers of money, power and influence in conjunction with a favourable local press and a big public relations campaign; the other side would be operating mainly at a grass roots level with limited finance and media coverage by comparison.

However, there is one more lesson from the public consultation. Despite all the public relations puffery, the people of Aberdeen were smart enough to see through all this and think for themselves. My opinion is that if they do hold a public referendum, the city square would be thrown out.

I Hiv A Dream

Aberdeen City, Articles, Creative Writing, Satire and Humour No Responses »

May 122011

By Bob Smith.

I hiv a dream
Said yon Martin Luther King
I ti hiv a dream
Some happiness for ti bring

I hiv a dream
The toon centre’s free o cars
I hiv a dream
Acsef are sent ti Mars

I hiv a dream
Ti banish aa poverty
I hiv a dream
Fae “money men” we’re aa free

I hiv a dream
We’ve nae bond wi drugs an booze
I hiv a dream
Rangers an Celtic aywis lose

I hiv a dream
Oor toon’s clean an bricht
I hiv a dream
The granite’s gien a dicht

I hiv a dream
Stop worshipin at the “money”altar
I hiv a dream
Multi Nationals start ti falter

I hiv a dream
Dinna listen ti Donald’s bling
I hiv a dream

Menie faimilies start ti sing

I hiv a dream
UTG’s left aleen as weel
I hiv a dream
Oor cooncil is less feel

I hiv a dream
Fowk see sense unfurled
I hiv a dream
We aa bide in a better warld

I hiv a dream
P&J’s nae langer the Trump Gazette
I hiv a dream
An impartial view ye’ll get

I hiv a dream
The sma shoppie it survives
I hiv a dream
Supermarkets nae langer thrive

I hiv a dream
Dons win a European Cup
I hiv iss dream
Syne I waaken up

I hiv a dream
We aa live in peace
I hiv a dream
Iss wid be some eese

©Bob Smith “The Poetry Mannie” 2010

UTG Remains Opportunity Site In Aberdeen Local Plan

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

Apr 262011

By Mike Shepherd.

The Council have decided to keep Union Terrace Gardens as development opportunity in the new Aberdeen local plan despite hundreds of objections to this.

A report to Council on Wednesday (27th April 2011) lists over 360 objections and only two in support.

Numerous objections are listed in an appendix to the report. These are typical:

“Support retention of public open space other than in exceptional circumstances. Financial incentives by private sector should not count as exceptional circumstances sufficient to outweigh normal polices else planning system simply becomes a question of deep pockets.”

“Union Terrace Gardens could be sympathetically improved by one or more of the following: providing access down, reopening the toilets, covering the railway and dual carriageway and opening shops, cultural facilities and cafes in the archways.”

“In line with the city’s policies, it should be subject to conservation orders, like Duthie Park.”

“Union Terrace Gardens is the most obvious remnant of the Denburn the tributary of the Dee that saw the earliest habitation. It is an important topographical feature that also highlights the significant engineering features of the Union Street bridge and Rosemont Viaduct. Without the gardens these features become unintelligible and the centre of Aberdeen‘s history is much the poorer.”

“Add Union Terrace Gardens as a protected site as per Policy D4 – Aberdeen‘s Granite Heritage.”

The Council position is stated as follows:

“Whilst there is clearly a high level of debate regarding the Gardens it is our contention that it is important to identify that options for the redevelopment of the Gardens are currently under consideration. Any development proposal for the Gardens will need to be considered against the Local Development Plan, including the City Centre Development Framework, which sets out criteria for the future of the Gardens. The scale and nature of any improvements will be subject to other consultations and ultimately a planning application.

“In light of the above, the Council does not agree with the suggestion to remove this opportunity site from the Proposed Plan and to remove the Gardens from the opportunity site.”

See: http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=13439

Once the local plan has been approved by the Council, the next stage is for the plan to be independently assessed by a reporter. It is to be hoped that this issue is picked up and dealt with by an examination in public, not the least because a quarter of the 1,544 representations received on the plan concerned the Gardens.

The Council seem to be determined not to listen to the public on Union Terrace Gardens. They also ignored the outcome of the public consultation on the city square even though a majority of 1,270 said no to the development of the park.

The comment made above by the Council that:

“The scale and nature of any improvements will be subject to other consultations”

… is difficult to take seriously in this regard. The Council appear to be only interested in one outcome and it’s not what the public want.

The World Is Asked What Aberdeen Should Look Like

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

Apr 222011

By Mike Shepherd.

The design competition for the City Square Project was launched this week. The brief provided by Malcolm Reading Associates follows Sir Ian Wood’s ‘strict parameters’ with walk-on, walk-off access from four sides.
http://www.malcolmreading.co.uk/architecturalcompetitions/citygarden

Teams of designers will initially be asked to register an interest in the project by 13th June.
A shortlist of 5 – 7 designers will then be picked to produce seven designs, with the city square board and the Council approving the final design in December.

The public will be allowed to ‘scrutinise’ and comment on the designs but not pick them. The Press and Journal reported on Thursday that there has been world-wide interest in the competition.
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2233305

But, therein lies the problem. The rest of the world is being asked what the centre of Aberdeen should look like – but not the people in the city.

A year ago, we were consulted on whether we wanted a modern city square. We said no with a majority of 1,270; this was ignored.

I have a big problem with a modern city square in the centre of Aberdeen and this concerns the concept of architectural authenticity. This is the idea that a building or feature should harmonise with its location. The concept is easy to explain using our city. The Victorian Union Terrace Gardens is in harmony with the old granite buildings that surround it, whereas the 1960’s St Nicholas House is obviously out of place in the Granite City. The problem is even recognised in the current Aberdeen local plan:

“The standard of design in new development has been raised as a widespread cause for concern during the preparation of this Local Plan. This is one reason why new development can raise so much hostility amongst the public and this situation must change. The City has such a rich and relatively intact heritage of older buildings that shortcomings of newer ones are all the more obvious.”
http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.asp?lID=17124&sID=4209

It is possible to produce modern buildings with architectural authenticity in sensitive locations; Elphinstone Hall built next to Kings College in 1930 is a good example.

A modern city square in the centre of Aberdeen would not be architecturally authentic and would be jarringly out of place with the older buildings.

It would totally change the character of the city centre and would probably accelerate the current trend whereby there has been piecemeal destruction of old granite buildings to be replaced by soulless modern buildings. This could be exacerbated if TIF funding is approved for a £70m loan.

This loan has to be paid back by capturing new or extra business rates and encouraging new city centre developments would be the main mechanism by which this could happen.

I was born and brought up in Aberdeen and I am intensely proud of the city. It is the granite buildings and the distinctive architecture that bring such a strong sense of locality and identity.

Once Aberdeen’s heritage starts to disappear on a large scale, the city will lose its unique character and will start to look like everywhere else. We will be denied our unique sense of belonging as Aberdonians.

We will not be given a public referendum on the city square. As it stands, a modern city square is being imposed on us whether we like it or not. We do not have to react to this in a “whatever will be, will be” mood of resignation. We can make sure that our voice is heard!

Join the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens on www.friendsofutg.org

Old Susannah’s Journal No.31 – Lush Lush My Deer

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Information, Opinion, Satire and Humour No Responses »

Apr 152011

It’s been yet another lively week in the ‘Deen; by the time this is published, Old Susannah will have been on SHMU radio discussing the fate of the Tullos Hill Roe Deer, election leaflets will be pouring through your letterbox, and petrol will reach £2 million a gallon.

At present there are still no answers to relevant, specific questions I sent to the Council’s tree men and Aileen Malone (aka ‘HoMalone’ – when left in charge of something, chaos breaks out and hilarity ensues. Well, that’s one possible origin for this nickname). But I’ll keep trying.
Those environmentally friendly folk at Lush are throwing themselves into the battle with gusto. A team is cycling up from Lush Edinburgh and should arrive around 12:30pm this coming Wednesday at the Lush shop in Aberdeen’s Union Street.

Their slogan against the cull is a good one: “Too Deer a Price.” Their efforts and those of people and organisations from local to international level might make a difference yet.

However, those nice people at the Scottish Information Commission have some concerns over one of my Freedom of Information requests, which – believe it or not – the Council answered late, answered by refusing to answer and offered to do an inquiry which might well have never happened. Another few years and I might have a good story for you. Don’t hold your breath.

Finally, you may recall that Aberdeen’s former head, Sue Bruce, landed up in a job for the City of Edinburgh, much to our great sadness. The capital has since found at least five of its employees were involved in a massive fraud to do with awarding work and projects without proper tenders taking place and paying for work that was never done.

Makes you glad to be in the Granite City where fraud is unheard of, where there is never any City employee helping the police figure find out where £300,000 of taxpayer money went, where work always goes out to tender properly and is never just given to local builders automatically. But, onwards to some defining words for this past week.

Grass:
(Noun 1) – member of herbal family of plants characterised by slender shoots of green leaf, a grazing crop suitable for herbivores such as cows and sheep. Just don’t mention the deer).
(Noun 2) – slang term for cannabis sativa, a substance which can allegedly temporarily impair the consciousness of the person who smokes or otherwise ingests the leaves and or buds of said plant.
(Verb) – to bring another’s wrongdoing to the attention of the public or authorities. All of which bring us nicely to …John Stewart, Council Leader – a man apart.

Hundreds of people heard this pearl of wisdom from JS and raced to Union Terrace Gardens with rolling paper, matches and things called bongs, only to be disappointed

His critics allegedly call him names and go to his pub to hit him. But they can’t silence him. If the Church of Scotland deserves an ASBO for not behaving as he wants it to, he’ll say so by grassing them up to the local newspapers.

It is hugely surprising that his Press & Journal claim that the Church of Scotland deserved an ASBO (see last week’s column) didn’t get taken up internationally.

Also, in a really brave move, he’s called our attention to a little-known fact. Brace yourselves: in John’s own words:

“there is not much in Union Terrace Gardens except grass.”

‘How did he work that out?’ I can hear you ask aloud as you read this over your cornflakes.

Stone me. Hundreds of people heard this pearl of wisdom from JS and raced to Union Terrace Gardens with rolling paper, matches and things called bongs, only to be disappointed. It seems that John was complaining that the parking lot to be was full of the kind of grass you walk on, or eat if you are a deer that the Council hasn’t yet shot, (sorry, culled). Either that, or he took all the funny grass for himself and his friends on the Council – that would explain quite a lot. How did our society let this happen?

“Let’s face it, Union Terrace Gardens, apart from a few trees and the floral crest, is just grass”

Our intrepid Council Leader told the Press & Journal:

“This (the design competition) is an excellent opportunity for Aberdeen to show how good it is at creating gardens. We will see what comes through from the design brief, but I am quite looking forward to seeing the designs.”

Well, so far Aberdeen City has shown how good it is at losing arts funding, keeping schools open, caring for the elderly, and ensuring that no fraudsters are operating within the council stealing hundreds of thousands of pounds. Aberdeen has also shown how good it is at propping up the AECC, selling land at millions of pounds less than market value, filling in potholes and closing libraries. A mere £140 million pound project poses little challenge – even if we have no money.

Someone in the City Council attended the meetings – yet the head of the Council claimed to have no idea the project existed

There is no reaction yet from governments in New York, Paris and London – but in light of John’s comments they will be swiftly moving to check their city centre parks for grass and make any necessary corrections. Let’s all hope that after the design contest, which we are all eagerly awaiting as we struggle to pay bills, buy food and petrol etc. will ensure that there is none of this grass-type stuff left over.

I can only hope that John stays away from grass lest his otherwise astute judgement, financial acumen, people skills and fine mind suffer.

Tory councillor Alan Donnelly quite rightly asked:

“What planet do people think we are living on if they think we would support the destruction of Union Terrace Gardens?”

Well, it could be the same planet that saw Aberdeen City’s ACSEF spending some £300k (meant for Peacock Visual Arts) on a consultation showing, er, a big concrete square where the gardens now are. That’s some coincidence.

Deja Vu
(French expression) literally ‘already seen’. A spooky feeling that you’ve been there before. As Aberdeen Voice historian Alex Mitchell alluded to in one of his excellent articles on the City’s history, the £1.2 million pounds of funding that was lost to the City as ACSEF, the City and (£750 million pound a year taxpayer funded) Scottish Enterprise bravely battled to kill Peacock Visual Arts long-planned expansion was not the first time the City scored such a colossal own goal.

Cast your mind back some 5 or 6 years.

The Citadel had been earmarked for an arts centre. It wasn’t going to be turned into a parking lot or shopping mall and there definitely weren’t going to be any deer or any grass: everyone could have been happy. The plan was written up and many meetings took place – the City, arts leaders, etc. No one knows to this day precisely why we didn’t get a plan to the Arts Council on time (spooky!).

Kilroy Silk wanted to distance himself from the party because he thought they were ridiculous. How bad is that?

Someone in the City Council attended the meetings – yet the head of the Council claimed to have no idea the project existed. If memory serves, the sum was probably £1 million and change. So if you get the feeling that your cash-strapped City had lost Arts Council funding previously – you are correct.

Was it a bit of history eerily repeating itself – or is it possible that the City has not been very well managed and organised for a few years? Something to think about. Ask your local Councillor or get out a Ouija board and try to contact the LibDems. While you’re at it; ask them about the deer, Loirston Loch, services for the elderly and school closures should you make contact.

UKIP
(collective noun) Comedy troupe such as Bremner Bird & Fortune, Monty Python, The Goonies, and the Lib Dems.

Faced with the Kafkaesque deer, Union Terrace Gardens, and Loirston Loch horror stories, we need to keep our spirits up and what organisation is better placed to give everyone a much-needed heartfelt laughing fit than the United Kingdom Independence Party?

He might not be a part of the UKIP posse any more, but the very thought of colourful (literally) TV personality Kilroy-Silk alone should get you chuckling. You might not know it, but the UKIP party has had more infighting than the SNP/Lib Dem coalition.

There apparently was a UKIP candidate in East Kilbride who had a whole laundry list of fascist policies; the UKIP mainstream disowned him. In fact Kilroy Silk wanted to distance himself from the party because he thought they were ridiculous. How bad is that? Their MEP member Nigel Farage has made some errors of judgment including appearing on Have I Got News For You (unaware that he was the biggest laugh of the night) and as well as car crash TV, this UKIP leader has serious slapstick form.

On the day of the General Election in May, Farage’s two-seater plane got entangled in a UKIP banner it was trailing and crashed shortly after take-off from an airfield in Northamptonshire – no one was hurt. Vote for them if you like – can’t be worse than what we’ve got, and they obviously have a sense of humour.

Next week: More of the same

We Winna See The Trees Fer The Widd

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

Apr 152011

By Bob Smith.

Destroy his vision at yer peril
Ye bunch o ignorant plebs
He’s mair money than the lot o ye
An aat includes ony media celebs

He thinks ye’ve gin aff yer heid
If ye turn doon his generous offers
We’ll nae survive withoot him
There’s nae money in city coffers

Neen o yer speil he wints ti hear
Aboot the green lungs o the city
Iss is aboot pittin lots o dosh
In his Acsef cronies kitty

A fine specimen o a roof gairden
Fae some architect wull be seen
The toon centre transformed says he
Fair sparkling in front o yer een

Faa‘s mou dis aa iss crap cum fae?
O aye yon millionaire mannie Widdie
Some think the billie a richt gweed chiel
Ti the rest he’s a bliddy diddie

This Generation, This Time, This Place – I Think Not

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

Apr 082011

Sixteen year-old Kenneth Watt, born and bred in Aberdeen and a friend of Union Terrace Gardens, tells Aberdeen voice of his sadness at the apparent disrespect for the city’s youth in consultations by Aberdeen City Council and ACSEF, particularly in relation to the City Gardens/Civic Square Project.

It was my intention to make my voice heard. I had invested considerable time in research and preparation of a presentation I hoped to make to the Aberdeen City Council at today’s meeting.

Throughout this sorry saga I have had few replies to e-mails sent to councillors and frequently found my phone calls not returned.

I should not have been surprised that they decided not to allow deputations, including mine, to be made at the meeting.

Councillors instead argued about the politics of the motion put before them. No action was taken, and it just became more and more apparent how out of touch our representatives are with their electorate.. It would appear a distinct lack of financial knowledge was displayed during the session, along with sweeping statements, one example being a claim that Peacock Visual Arts were never fully financially secure. It should be noted that they only needed a further £3.5 million from the Council as the rest was already secured.

Conversely, the cost of the City Gardens Project has not been calculated. The proposed method of funding (T.I.F.) has not been used in the UK to date, and reports of successful use has been confined to areas in the United States of considerable deprivation: a description which does not fit Union Terrace Gardens.

It would appear to me to be significantly disingenuous for ACSEF to invest/ promote Youth Matters when the input of the younger generations have been ignored on so many occasions. This I find unacceptable.

It’s not Council leader John Stewart’s generation that will have to face the brunt of what seems like a modern design for the City Square Project in 2011. It is my generation that in twenty year’s time will have to support the council repaying debts, should the project over run, and address possible service cuts and traffic problems invariably associated with the project – not to mention the loss of unique green space in the city centre because of a naive decision taken today.

Taking the views of only 1% of the city’s future tax payers is disgraceful, and completely dispels any myth that we are the forefront of this project.

Not only have our elected representatives seemingly ignored our offers of dialogue, but I feel that there has been inadequate consultation with Aberdeen’s youth in general, and little or no engagement with Aberdeen’s youth in the decision-making process. The consultation, such as it was, was invalid, too narrow and did not reflect the views of the youth of Aberdeen.

In the City Square Project public consultation amongst Secondary Schools, a total of 113 pupils were consulted out of over ten thousand children studying in Aberdeen City. It is, surely, essential in such a major development like this, that my generation is consulted properly, using a large, valid and representative sample. Taking the views of only 1% of the city’s future tax payers is disgraceful, and completely dispels any myth that we are the forefront of this project.

Aberdeen City Youth Council has released a new consultation named ‘Hear My Voice’ which was launched late last year. By 2015, they aim to distribute this survey around all schools in Aberdeen and get a minimum of 5,000 returns. Respondents have to indicate whether they agree, disagree or are unsure about 64 statements covering a wide range of issues in the city concerning them.

Statement nine in the Transport and Open Space category reads:

“Union Terrace Gardens should be kept and invested in as they are now. Lighting, cleaning and upkeep should be improved to make the gardens more attractive and more events held there to increase usage.”

So far there have been 165 ‘pilot’ responses. 161 of these agreed with the statement.

Another statement is that:

“Young people should be more involved in decisions about how budgets are spent as they are not listened to enough.”

A unanimous 165 agreed with that.

I recently found out that over 60% of cuts planned in the council’s budget will have direct implications on under-25s in Aberdeen.

I struggle to understand how the city Council can afford to commit to such a large project, the funding of which is not yet secure. It would appear that not only will 60% of cuts have such a direct impact on Aberdeen’s youth, but we will now be the generation who may very well have to pick up the bill in the future for something we don’t want.

“This generation, this time, this place.”

ACSEF’s catchy public relations campaign sound bite may appear promising but it is more likely to be nothing more than another hollow gesture.

It’s not your generation. It’s my generation and that of my peers, if not our children, that will have to face the consequences of a decision made today.

It’s not this time. It is in ten or twenty years’ time that the city will really suffer from problems caused by decisions made in 2011. Look at the Bon Accord and St Nicholas Centres – they’ve caused countless traffic problems and have isolated George Street, which was once a prosperous and vital artery into the city centre.

It is now largely abandoned and crime has reportedly increased since the development. The council’s decision in 1985 to support the plan was one pushed through by business interests in the face of a significant level of opposition. The voice of the people was ignored. That is clearly echoed by the council’s actions today. Just because Sir Ian Wood has pledged £50m funding does not mean that the City Square Project is viable and worthwhile.

It’s not this place. It’s a commercialised business venture that will see countless years of history and heritage destroyed, and very likely, at a vast expense to the taxpayer.

If the council wish to represent the views of the people, then they need to conduct a fair consultation, involving Aberdeen’s citizens in the decision-making process.

My main proposal to the council is as follows: Leave Union Terrace Gardens alone.

It is reasonable to assume that the council will have vacated St Nicholas House by the end of this year, and it’s quite apparent that it would cost them vast sums of money to demolish it. Why not hand the area of land that St Nicholas House covers over to Sir Ian Wood, allow him to demolish it and create a fantastic green space around Provost Skene’s House and opposite the beautiful building that is the Marischal College.

Not only will it attract more visitors to the area, it will get rid of the eyesore tower block at no cost to the public and preserve hundreds of years of history and heritage that exists in Union Terrace Gardens today.

Behind Closed Doors: The Secretive City Square Project

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

Apr 082011

By Mike Shepherd.

A proposal was made to discuss Thursday’s special council meeting on Union Terrace Gardens in private.
The reason put forward by the council lawyer was that the motion questioned the ‘validity and veracity’ of a report which led to the council’s approval to progress the City Square Project last May.

See article: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2205463

The public have every right to be concerned about this move. Too many details about the City Square Project are being withheld. Councillors are being briefed by council officials on the scheme’s progress, yet these briefings are not being made public.

These contain details such as timetables for the project and how the city square design is to be picked (the city square board selects the final design and the council will be asked to approve their choice).

Union Terrace Gardens is on Common Good land and belongs to the people of Aberdeen. It is our park and we have a right to be informed on any proposals for it.

Although the Council will probably retain ‘ownership’ of the land on which the Gardens are located, the building above it and the city square is likely to be owned by a private company in partnership with the council. The building will be about 5/6ths the size of Union Square. What will go into this enormous three-storey concourse given that the remit is that it will be a ‘civic and cultural’ space?

The latest idea is to put a conference centre in there, although this brings into question the fate of the Exhibition Centre at the Bridge of Don with which it would compete. Failure is not an option for the Exhibition Centre as it has been loaned £28m by the council. If the centre closes, then this debt will be transferred to the council budget with immediate and potentially calamitous consequences for the city’s finances.
See article: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1877056

An interesting perspective on the city square building was provided by an online comment made last week to the Press and Journal’s letters column:

“The design process for Union Terrace Gardens will be unlike most design processes. Most conventional designs tend to start with a use, before proceeding to a site and then a brief, and finally designs to enable a scheme to be built. For UTG this will effectively be reversed. This is partly because the scheme is opportunity led, but mostly because of the scale and significance of the expected design. This scheme will be, by its very nature, more akin to designing a new street in the city, than designing a new building.”
See article: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2205094#ixzz1IiidEav9

A limited company has appeared centre stage in the controversy and has been given control of the design competition. This is the Aberdeen City Gardens Trust, about which very little is known. Last week it was revealed that they have approached the council to invite them to be partners in the trust. The council have deferred the decision as they want to know more about the trust, what they are letting themselves in for and the implications of this.
See article: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2205463

It is not only the council that needs to find out more about the trust, the public need to be informed about everything to do with this company. Who are they?

Much to do with the way that the proposed development of Union Terrace Gardens has been driven through is highly questionable.

The public were consulted and ignored when they voted no to the scheme. The council meeting last May was informed that the results of the consultation “clearly indicated a wish for change”, when they didn’t. Local businessmen urged the council to ignore the consultation, Acsef minutes for the 20th April meeting state:

“There is a mandate from the business community to proceed to the next stage”.
See : http://www.acsef.co.uk/uploads/reports/21/13%20April%2010.doc

From then on, the project became ‘opportunity led’ and the public have been progressively ignored as it has progressed. Consultation has become two-way traffic between the project management board and the council; opponents of the scheme have been left scrabbling to find out what is going on. A modern city square for the centre of Aberdeen is being imposed on us whether we like it or not.

From now on, the possibility of keeping Union Terrace Gardens is not on offer unless the Council votes against the city square, and so far they have not. Even the selection of a final design for the city square is being taken out of our hands. The businessmen and council officials on the project management board will take that choice.

If like me you think this state of affairs is appalling, join the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens through our website www.friendsofutg.org

We are campaigning to keep our city-centre park.

Older Entries Newer Entries