Sep 012011
 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But there are larger points at stake.

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

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

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

Income from trees? Depends who’s talking

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

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

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

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

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

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

Public Consultation: ‘was robust’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Media can’t see the Trees for the Forest

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

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

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

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

Scottish SPCA don’t understand the project – says Watts

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

My Opinion and Conclusions Summarised

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

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

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

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

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

Watts next? – my opinion

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Aug 042011
 

By Tom Shepherd. 

Idle banter, useless prattle
Blether, gossip, tittle-tattle
“Have you heard?”
“No, what’s the matter?”
 Scuttle-butt and empty chatter.

Vacant news and hollow lies
Scarring friendships, breaking ties
Neighbours gossip, rumour mills
Seeds of distrust sown, great ills
Harvested without a care
People once who trusted, stare.
Curtains twitch and heads are turned
Lovers part and colleagues spurned.

As threads through which we all relate
Are severed by fear, doubt and hate,
Where honeyed tongues drown honesty
In stagnant mire of false decree
When speculation, most uncouth,
With hateful slander strangles proof.
Let voices soar, cry from the roof;
“Whatever happened to the truth?”

Image credit: © Guy Shapira | Dreamstime.com

 

 

 

Aug 042011
 

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

Tartan Day.   

 A few impressive pipe bands, some knights in armour, and the Lord and Lady Provost paying tribute to the legacy of William Wallace.   Wallace famously fought for independence for his people against the rich and powerful tyrants of the day, who thought they were above the law.

You might say Wallace took ‘direct action’ to extremes.  How pleased he would have been to think our Provost and Council uphold the principles for which he was hung, drawn and quartered.

His statue of course overlooks the remains of the historic Denburn Valley, known to you and me as Union Terrace Gardens: also known to Wood and Milne as a cashcow.  How exactly the Wallace monument will look adjacent to any of the mysterious, unexplained, undisclosed £140 million pound proposals will be anyone’s guess.  

No doubt we will wind up with something that sensitively ‘connects’ the Victorian park to the impressive granite architecture.  In short expect glass, concrete, parking spaces and a monorail platform.  I suppose we could always take Wallace down and sell him for scrap metal to help with the UTG fundraising.  He’d have wanted it that way I am certain.

A few interesting titbits have been coming in from here and there.  Ms Valerie Watts showed up to speak to a Community Council Forum earlier this week, but she was unamused to be asked about the Tullos Hill roe deer cull.

Ms Watts also owes me a reply to a formal complaint on the whole Tullos issue; I’ve chased it up (again) today.

In fact the City is launching a PR offensive, and has offered to have officers present the tree proposal to community councils.  You might want to contact your council for details – the question and answer sessions (if any) alone should be worth showing up for.  We are told the community councils ‘only know what’s been in the media’, and don’t know the whole facts.

Media’s fault of course.  Nothing to do with the council not giving the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth from the start of this great plan.  Of course if people wanted to write to Ms Watts to either support or reject the cull (or ask how the £43,800 ‘repayment’ was accidentally forgotten when I asked about it), all they have to do is drop an email to her at chiefexecutive@aberdeencity.gov.uk.

Feel free to ask any questions you want; but as a health and safety precaution, do not hold your breath until the answer arrives. At this rate we won’t get on with any definitions, so without any further ado, I will get stuck in.

Association of Community Councils

(noun) a collective body promoting the importance of community councils.  A not-for-profit body with the following aims  (well at least until it is culled next year):

  • “To encourage exchanges of information between Community Councils.
  • “To promote examples of best practice in the work of Community Councils
  • “To offer impartial and unbiased advice, training and information to Community Councils
  • “To facilitate communication between national bodies and Community Councils
  • “To preserve the independence of each Community Council
  • “To ascertain, collect, and express nationally, the views of Community Councils.
    From: http://www.ascc.org.uk/about

Unfortunately, it’s very, very expensive to run this Association.  It costs a massive £70,000 per year to run*, so obviously this forum for sharing ideas and experiences to strengthen community councils must be culled.

Aberdeen has its own unique way of dealing with community councils – it ignores them.  When it comes to consultations about deer, travellers, Union Terrace Gardens, closing schools or cutting services, our City Councillors generously take decisions without unduly burdening the elected community councillors.

Nigg Community Council was told, not asked, about the takeover of its park by Cove Bay Rangers football club (fan club president:  Ms Kate Dean).  They were told, not asked over the deer cull and the Loirston Loch stadium.  Just this week Nigg CC for some reason objected to a housing officer’s plans to throw Calder Park open to travellers for a few months.

What’s wrong with not being asked about this great plan in advance, I wonder?

This is all part of the City’s ‘consultation’ and ‘transparency’ drive.  Once the Association of Community Councils is gone, the Community Councils will be on their own.   In fact I’m surprised we haven’t had city councillors trying to kill off the community councils yet.  Some of these councils get nearly £3,000 a year or so to help people in their communities.

Perhaps it would be better to leave important matters to our tried and tested, honest, reliable, transparent, vibrant central government officials and councillors (well, the ones who keep out of jail and don’t get arrested for kerb crawling anyway.  Great minds like HoMalone, The Fletch and The Dean and so on).  I know I can barely get through a day on my own without their guidance.

The Association stood up for the community councils, shared best practice, shared experiences, and helped people (me directly for one) –  no wonder it had to go. 

*Note:   £70K doesn’t’ get you much these days.  Aberdeen’s ‘Change Manager’ earns £80,000 per  year. Scottish Enterprise costs some £750 million per year.  And ACSEF’s annual running costs?  No one knows for certain.

Streamline

(verb)  to abbreviate, shorten, abridge an object or procedure.

Central Government has recently announced it wants to ‘stop’ people creating future impediments to great projects like the AWPR.  The Loirston Loch stadium, being plunked in the heart of greenbelt land, never even got called in.

Time for more projects like the stadium to be ‘streamlined.’

You will have seen the dreadful news this week.  There was nothing sensationalist or alarmist in the Evening Express headline which told us in effect ‘Not building the AWPR costs £1 million per month’!  Absolutely shocking!  To think that people who don’t want this road built actually are standing up and using their legal rights to challenge it!  They even have the nerve to challenge the public/private funding mechanism the government wants to use to pay for the dream highway.

Obviously I believe it costs at least £1 million a month not to build the road – but you might want to have a look at what the Road Sense people think actually building the road will cost:-  http://www.road-sense.org/AWPR-MortgagingYourFuture.html .

I wouldn’t worry too much about their figures.  The road isn’t going to cost you a great deal of money.  However your children and their children’s cost for the road is another story, but like Scarlett O’Hara – with PPI financing, you can ‘worry about it tomorrow.’  Financially, it is as sensible as the funding plans for the ‘transformation’ of Union Terrace Gardens.

‘Streamlining’ planning applications can only be a good thing.

If anyone out there can figure out how much the AWPR has already cost in consultants and consultations, I’d really like to hear from you. Let’s be fair – there was a consultation.   A great big costly travelling consultation, with bells and whistles.

Of course the routes suggested in the very expensive consultation have nothing to do whatsoever with the road plans as they stand now, but let’s not split hairs. Money is very tight right now. We’ve got to cut corners (if we’re going to have the dosh to keep a couple of wars and our banks going).. The suggestion of ‘streamlining’ the justice system to get rid of pesky jury trials was a great idea – we may still get that one.

‘Streamlining’ planning applications can only be a good thing.

It is very reassuring to know that Alex Salmond is putting his mind to this worthy end.  We really should have made it easier for that nice Mr Trump from America to build the world’s greatest environmental disaster – sorry – golf course at Menie…  Look how much good it’s doing for everyone!  Jobs creations!  Tourists!  Holiday Homes!  Stabilised Sand dunes (my personal favourite).  So if we don’t immediately agree to start building the £191 million pound road (old estimate), then we are losing £1 million per month – if not per day!

This can’t go on.  I wouldn’t dare to question this statistic, as it was in print and must be accurate.  (By the way, assuming the costs haven’t risen from the £191 million, the new AWPR can be yours in only 16 years at £1 million per month – or twice that with PPI financing).

Let’s just start saying ‘yes’ to everything.  We have a government that wants to build as much stuff as it can, and it doesn’t want the likes of us to have to worry about the details.  I think they’re just trying to be helpful.  To someone.

Direct Action

(mod English noun)  form of protest where the protestors stage some kind of highly visible challenge to opponents, to call attention (especially media attention) to an issue or problem . 

This form of protest is increasingly popular with environmental and economic activists.  And it freaks the government out completely – which is totally wrong of course.

In a long-forgotten age, if your elected officials acted improperly or against the common good, you could write a letter and expect some form of answer.  If you didn’t get the answer you wanted, you could stage a protest march, get petitions signed, and so on.

It’s not as if our Government is scared of protestors.

If you still had no success with your cause in the good old days, you could take to the forests and rob the rich and give to the poor, or board a ship filled with tea from England and throw its contents into Boston Harbour.  Or have a revolution.

But no one ever remembers such events these days, and writing letters and starting petitions is much, well –safer.  Still, it’s a bit easier to ignore a petition than the Boston Tea Party.  Robin Hood is remembered as a hero, and King John the villain.  Who I wonder are our future heroes and villains?  Whose statues will be revered at the future Union Terrace car park and shopping mall?

It’s not as if our Government is scared of protestors.  If they were, they would have (for instance) put an undercover cop like Mr Mark Kennedy in place to spy on environmental protestors for seven years.  It does look like the poor policeman went ‘native’ in the end, and the courts did not think much of the police tactics used.

Such unwarranted police paranoia would never override principles of a democratic, free society.  But as the Met are not prepared to discuss this matter (even though it’s been all over the newspapers), we have to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Old Susannah will introduce ‘Just Do It’ next week at the Belmont; there will be discussion afterwards as well. 

‘Just Do It’ follows a group of environmental protestors as they meet their assorted targets and enemies head on. If you’re free on Friday 12 Aug at 6.30, please do come along.   I have had a preview of the film, and can promise it will raise a few interesting issues. (Rumours that the sale of deer antler headbands are about to go through the roof in Aberdeen are unconfirmed).

Jul 222011
 

By Bob Smith.

 

Yon Murdoch mannie’s nae happy
In fact he’s jist fair pit oot
The NOTW accused o hackin phones
An pyein oor bobbies aff wi loot

Papers fer some mony ears
Hiv hid ower muckle swye
Politicians aa feart ti act
In case they’re hung oot ti dry

The investigative journalist hack
We still o coorse div need
Bit nae the type faa brak the rules
Jist ti satisfy Murdoch’s greed

Noo fowk faa bocht his papers
Some class  a Murdoch Muppet
An aa helpit prop up his empire
Oot his brose bowl they hiv suppit

Lit’s nae forget oor local lot
Faa git up ti aa sorts o capers
As promoters o  yon Donald Trump
Losh he’s nivver oot their papers 

The P&J shud bi worried
If its practices are reviewed
Ower lang its hid a monopoly
Gweed fowk’s views are screwed

Fae Lowrenkirk ti Lerwick
An ower wast ti Stornoway
The daily fit rules the roost?
It’s the bliddy P&J

It’s nae eese noo girnin
Ti thon lot at thePCC
We need fowk fa are independent
An fae press barons wull bide free

Ye’ll nae fin me greetin
If Murdoch he gings bust
An aa his media empire
It finally bites the dust

The only Murdoch a div like
Is fae “Sunday Post’s” comic stuff
An aul farrant sort o bobby
He’d  hae Rupert in hauncuffs 

©Bob Smith “The Poetry Mannie” 2011
Image credit: © Christopher Hall | Dreamstime.com 

 

Jul 012011
 

By Bob Smith.

Hiv ye heard o the fairy tale
Fit’s telt bi oor local press
Faa boast they report aa local news?
A richt fable ye maun confess

An award winnin film ‘You’ve Been Trumped’
Ti a full picter hoose it played
Nivver a wird in the P&J
Nae EE heidlines iss made

Noo it wis the Scottish premier
O the story aboot fowk at Menie
Ye wid hae thocht iss warranted
A scrawl fae a journalist’s penie

Can ye tell fact fae fiction
Fan oor local press div print?
Stories aboot gyaan’s on at Menie
Ah’m feart the truth gits tint

Noo Trump flees in on private jet
Aa ower their front page it’s splashed
Yet aboot harassment o the Menie fowk
They’re nae aat bliddy fashed

Maybe o coorse oor local press
Ti print some stories they’re nae able
Jist in case they fin theirsels
Banished fae Trump’s tap table.

©Bob Smith “The Poetry Mannie” 2011

 

Jun 102011
 

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.

Summer in Aberdeen.  Lighting the barbeque (rain permitting) then standing around it (to warm your hands up) while someone inevitably insists on taking over the cooking, ensuring you get a burger burnt on the outside yet still frozen inside.

Old Susannah is off for a spray-tan tomorrow so she’ll be bright orange (or maybe not) for the season’s most important event – the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens picnic.  My picnic basket has been dusted off, a few brewdogs put in the deep freeze, and raingear laid out (just in case) for the big day Saturday.

If you think the City’s economic future doesn’t depend on putting a carpark where the verdant remnant of the Denburn Valley is, then I will see you there Saturday.

Old Susannah was at the RGU students’ fashion show last Thursday as a guest of one of the lecturers; the designs on show were impressively creative and individualistic.  It was a professional, enjoyable show, but I hope they do better on the drink front next time.  I guess it is possible to have clothing that’s not been sewn in the third world by children in sweatshops after all.

The mini bottle of unchilled white wine however was not to my group’s taste, and we made a break for it to Cafe 52 for some cold beer and wine.  Since then, I’ve had a wee bit of my time taken up looking into the deer cull.  It’s not too late (I hope) to stop this madness.

But now it’s time for a definition or two.

Mathematics: (noun) classical discipline encompassing algebra, geometry, trigonometry; numeracy.

Maths was never my strongpoint.  I still haven’t figured out how we can guarantee our economic future by getting a TIF loan for £100 million or more while being £50 million in debt to get rid of Union Terrace Gardens.

Thankfully, that’s what ACSEF and the Council tell me will happen, and I’m quite prepared to take their word for it.  I’m not even smart enough to figure out how a Stadium at Loirston Loch for 21,000 people can work on 1400 parking places (or how the stadium’s plan to have 80 buses reach Loirston from College Street in 15 minutes flat is feasible.  I personally can’t get a bus from Torry to Nigg when it’s busy that takes less than half an hour.  Obviously I’m doing something wrong.).

I’m working on my math skills in the hopes I too can see how black and white our city’s thinking must be.

I guess I also have to work on the mathematics behind the Haudagain Roundabout situation and the proposed Paper mill housing development.  It is good to know that Aberdeen is the best in the UK at something – and it’s official:  we are the best at roundabout traffic jams.  I’d always thought traffic moved just a wee bit slowly in the part of town as people stopped to admire the lovely roundabout itself.  However, as ever:  the City has a plan.

And here is the mathematical sense behind it:

Take: 1 x congested roundabout

Subtract: 100 nearby Middlefield houses to be bulldozed

Add: 900 private dwellings (builder:  one Mr S Milne) near congested roundabout

Add: shops, offices, a medical centre, business units and riverside bistro (builder:  Mr Milne)

Equals = minimal impact on roundabout traffic.

That’s right.  There will be minimal impact on the roundabout per our Council.

Personally I would have thought that the massive number of people trying to get a table at the riverside bistro alone would have led to traffic standstill; I hope to have an invitation to the opening night.  The medical centre makes a nice addition to any housing scheme of this size; it is the Vaseline that lets these great housing plans slide through planning departments.  It will be an extremely useful medical centre, as all of the people stuck on the roundabout will need treatment for C02 inhalation and dehydration.

My other mathematical ignorance concerns the Tullos Hill deer:

Take: 30 deer (Council’s estimate) which normally live 5-7 years

Subtract: (I mean ‘kill’ – sorry, I mean ‘cull’) 9 male deer this year

Balance: 21 deer

Plant: 40,000 trees

Number of trees left for each deer to eat =  1,904

Old Susannah can eat and drink with the best of them, but had no idea how hungry these tiny little deer must be:  1,904 trees is a fair amount per deer.  If each deer ate only 5% of this figure, that’s still 95.2 saplings for each deer (of the remaining herd after we’ve ‘managed’ 9 males as the City wishes).  It is a complete mystery to me how these hungry critters manage to survive on Tullos at all given the lack of trees.  Alas, I have no degree in forestry, so it looks like I must take the experts’ advice:  deer are dangerous vermin which if left unchecked will eat.

Not in Crisis: (mod English phrase) – phrase used to reassure others that a given situation is under control or no cause for concern.

If you follow football (a game somewhat similar to what they do at Pittodrie), then you will know that FIFA is ‘not in crisis’.  For you or me allegations of corruption, vote-rigging, bribery and dishonesty might spell a bit of trouble.  For the Federation Internationale de Football Associations, such issues can be shrugged off.  It is because of FIFA’s high moral stance that footballers the world ‘round behave with such dignity, ethics and honesty.

Behind every great organisation there is a great man.

Milne Homes has Stewart; the Wood Group PSN has Sir Ian, and FIFA has President Blatter.  Mr Blatter is so very popular that no one ran against him in the latest FIFA presidential election.  Or something like that.  I guess the question is does a mere £100 million ‘inducement’ really amount to a bribe?  I think not.  FIFA does have a ‘Standards Statute’, which is a modern fiction classic.  It reads in part:

“The Standard Statues contain all the provisions that are intrinsic to any constitutive texts worthy of such description.  We are therefore calling upon the Associations to examine these statutes meticulously and incorporate all of the articles and principles covered into their own statutes – for their own benefit and for the Good of the Game” – Joseph S Blatter

I love a good read, and gave the Statues a once-over.  However, I did not find the proper etiquette for accepting brown envelopes filled with money.  Perhaps someone here in Aberdeen can help with that.  In any event, it is hoped that all the world’s football associations will soon behave as Mr Blatter wishes.  Heaven forbid anything happens to put the beautiful game into disrepute.

Quasi-serious note

Last Christmas I put in a serious note about the holidays not having to be the beautiful family and friend-filled affairs that the TV commercials present.

Not everyone had 20 friends round their tree drinking eggnog before a horse-drawn sleigh ride.  Summer is rather the same.  The media tells you that you must look fantastic in your bathing suit (if it ever gets warm enough to put it on).  You must play volleyball on a sandy sunny beach and drink orange soda the same colour as your skin.

Don’t for a moment assume that everyone will be having tropical holidays and drinking cocktails from coconut shells under palm trees.  The economy is not great (despite the best efforts of ACSEF and ACC).  You might have your worries.  Take a ‘staycation’.  Visit Scotland.  Visit Tullos Hill for that matter.

But don’t let some false media advertising imagery fool you.  And if you are like many people struggling with one thing and another, remember:  at least you’re not Ryan Giggs.

Jun 032011
 

Voice’s Old Susannah shares with readers an recent email exchange with a prominent Aberdeen City councillor which has raised many more questions than answers.

A long, long time ago people learned about reasoned debate, how to structure logical arguments, and what the difference was between the rational and irrational.

Then again, some of us must have skipped school that day.

Let me share a recent chain of emails between me and Councillor Neil Fletcher with you. It started as a correspondence on the subject of the Tullos Hill Roe deer, and turned into something else.

First let’s just review how our elder statesmen – our experienced, mature elected officials – have handled the whole deer cull and tree issue. At first, we were happy: a tree for every citizen was an election pledge of the Liberal Democrats.

There were no worries, no costs, no deer cull – just trees. The tree planting phase 2 consultation passed with barely a word; after all, the consultation only said we might have to move some rabbits – deer didn’t get a look in.

Then March arrived and Cllr. Aileen Malone’s Housing & Environment Committee comes up with a new promise: give us £225,000 by 10 May or we promise to start shooting deer. No one knew about a cull before then; animal charities and sensible people were outraged, and most of us pledged not to give in to this blackmail. Protests and petitions were launched, but nothing would sway the Lib Dems. Democratic debate was stifled – at least until 26 May when the Cults, Bieldside and Milltimber Community Council let the issue be discussed.
See: https://aberdeenvoice.com/2011/05/you’re-shooting-yourself-in-the-foot-cults-cc-tells-malone/

Coming out of these discussions we learnt directly from the horse’s mouth (as it were) that unless the trees all reach a certain height in 2 years, the City has to pay back the grant money!

So there it is at the end of May – the most important factor in whether or not to plant trees on an arson target.

I wonder whether someone should have mentioned this just a wee bit earlier? Then we could have all laughed away any thought of Tullos Hill being suitable for the trees. The Council and its ‘experts’ don’t seem concerned about arson – the deer might nibble the trees, making them shorter – and you and I would have to stump up for the tree stumps. Tree planting – best to leaf it out, I think. But the Lib Dems are now out on a limb, as they are now saying in effect ‘well, we did ask for quarter of a million, but we have to shoot the deer anyway’.

What kind of people can come up with such disorganised, illogical, constantly shifting set of priorities? Old Susannah is on hand to answer that question.

I think Ms. Malone has shown us the kind of person she is: trustworthy, open, sensible and not at all stubborn. But what of our other guiding lights on the Council? How are they handling the pressure to stick to their moral high ground faced with ‘people like me?’

Let’s look at some correspondence between me and Mr Cool, aka Cllr. Neil Fletcher. I’d been copying him on email and occasionally writing directly to him. I’m not so sure he kens the difference.

Here are three emails:-

1. Neil Fletcher’s response to an email from myself (he is only on my email as a ‘CC’ not as addressee:

Dear Ms Kelly
I’m afraid we will simply not agree on this issue.
I see the culling of deer as a necessary, if unpleasant, measure to control a
species of animal in a non-natural environment, which has no natural predators. (I)
I believe that a cull is preferable to allowing the deer numbers in any area to

control themselves by starvation.
Culls happen all the time in Scotland, including Aberdeen, and I’m disappointed
that on this occasion, what is a widely accepted measure of animal control, is
being used to oppose the largest re-forrestation project the City has ever seen.

Additionally, this project is at practically no cost to the tax-payer. (II)
As you are not a constituent of mine, I do not intend to continue any further
correspondence with you on this matter.
Yours sincerely
Neil Fletcher

2. My reply to the above, sent on the morning of Sunday 29 May:

Good morning Mr Fletcher

Firstly the email was merely copied to you; you were not an addressee. I was doing so merely as a courtesy – and in the slim hope that as a Liberal Democrat you will realise that, in the words of the Cults Community Council leader ‘you do not have the people with you’ over this Tullos Hill affair.

Still thank you for your reply. It is regrettable that you are either unwilling or unable to separate the general, wide-ranging of culling from the specific Tullos Hill situation – a stable population of deer are to be decimated to turn their ecosystem into a forest – in an arson hotspot. Whether or not culling is required on a larger picture, a whole host of animal charities, no less the Scottish SPCA are condemning the plan to kill the Tullos Hill deer to transform Tullos Hill into a forest from an open, windswept meadow.

You still seem able to grasp that in terms of transparency, democratic process and duplicity, the handling of this situation is unacceptable.

I do have one unrelated question for you Councillor – is your Register of Interests up-to-date and correct? I only ask as a. you had absolutely no hospitality entries for the whole of 2010, and b. someone had told me – obviously they must be wrong – that you might have been involved in some way in a business which was doing some work for the City Council.

You list no directorships under ‘Section 3 Contracts’ (which for some reason has sub points numbered from 4.15). I am happy to accept that you had no hospitality in 2010 and have absolutely no connection whatsoever to a business or consultancy which is/was doing any business with the Council if you confirm this is true. Again, if the Register is completely correct on these two points, then I thank you in advance for clarifying that for me.

Yours sincerely

Suzanne Kelly

3.  And then – Cllr. Fletcher to me this past Sunday evening:-

Dear Ms Kelly

My register of interests is correct.

I admire your logic. He doesn’t agree with me, so he must be corrupt and I’ll
get him. (III)

I now avoid anything that I can that would require registering an interest.
Precisely because of emails like yours. (IV)

I used to go to various events to represent the Council, and when these were
registered, people like you pointed fingers. (V)

The Lord Provost now has trouble getting Councillors to go to such things, but
as I’d rather be in the pub or community centre with my mates than attend a
stuffy evening with a bunch of strangers, its a great excuse not to go. (VI)
As regards your allegations about me not registering a previous business

interest, I haven’t spoke to that gentleman for over 2 years, so it’s unlikely
I’d have anything to declare now. (VII)

Interestingly, Cllr Willie Young, who publicised my perfectly legitimate
interest in the hope that folk like you would jump to certain conclusions,
recently sold Oakbank School to that property developer at a price significantly
lower than it is worth with the housing that will be build there. He is also a
property developer himself. (VIII)

However, the Labour Group, whilst initially supporting the need for a cull, have
done a few somersaults to appear to be backing you now. So I doubt you’d be
interested raising doubts about his honesty. (IX)

Neil Fletcher

For the record, I have omitted nothing. I was being polite, but it looks as if I have hit a nerve or opened an old wound which I truly didn’t know existed – until just recently that is.

When I asked about a consultancy, I was referring to some new piece of information a source had suggested might be true. It is time to look into some of his wilder statements. In the emails above I have added Roman numerals in places, and would comment as follows:-

(I) Cllr. Fletcher keeps going to the general statement ‘culls are needed / culls happen’.

This has nothing to do with killing the Tullos Hill deer to turn their ecosystem into a forest. I have been to the Hill; I have no idea what Fletcher means when he says the deer live in an ‘unnatural’ environment. The laws of physics apply on Tullos Hill, and plants were growing. It seemed to be an oxygen/nitrogen atmosphere. No, the deer have no natural predators on the hill (except arsonists). Fact: Roe Deer bucks rarely exceed 5 years, does 6 to 7 years.

(II) Cllr. Fletcher says this tree-planting is at ‘practically no cost to the taxpayer.

If the trees reach a certain height that is true. If you don’t count the cost of a minimum £2,000 annually to kill 8 or 9 of the 30 deer (Council quote – other quotes are higher) for at least 3-5 years. And if the arsonists burn enough trees – we return all the grant money. Money of course does not grow on trees (however you protect them). The grant money is coming from the public purse. Hands up who knows how the money gets into the public purse in the first place.

(III) Cllr Fletcher is annoyed. The Register of Interests is a mandatory document all councillors have to keep accurate, up-to-date, and public (have a look – his is here – http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=150&T=6 )

I don’t know where to start as to the accuracy of the document and its contents. Its first page says it was updated in January 2011. On the last few pages there is an unsigned space for signature for Jan MacEachran (democratic services) and Neil – the dates for their non-existent signatures are 2007. Cllr. Fletcherl’s record shows he attended not a single solitary event in 2010 for the council or as hospitality. He did get to dozens of events in 2009 – I was merely wondering if the absence of 2010 was another error in the document.

The numbering is interesting. Item No. 3 – concerning Contracts – is sub-numbered starting with no. 4.15. Not how we do it where I work. Hmm.

(IV) Cllr. Fletcher says he is avoiding going to events.

Well, he did avoid going to any events he’d have to register in 2010. He’s lost this reluctance now – the document was prepared (apparently) in January 2011. The last two hospitality entries are for January 2011 – a cruise on a ship, and an evening at an arts centre. I do note that barely a single event – even those where the ticket price would have been printed on the ticket – is shown.  If the average price of a ticket at AECC is £20, and he is getting at least two tickets or more a time, he is a lucky man.

(V) ‘People like me’ Cllr. Fletcher writes.

I would quite like to have a description of ‘people like me’ from Mr Fletcher. I doubt he would like to be stereotyped.

(VI) Ah, yes: pity the poor councillor who’d rather be in the pub with his mates.

Instead, he was forced in 2009 to represent his constituents at approximately 20 events – mainly concerts at the AECC. Official regulations say that councillors should not accept a large number of invites/tickets from one source (like the AECC), These dull events included Eddie Izzard, Neil Young, Britain’s Got Talent, Gladys Knight, Kasabian, Proclaimers, Simple Minds….. the sound you can hear is my heart going out to him.

(VII) ‘That gentleman’ – What gentleman? I wondered what on earth he was talking about – it wasn’t the story I was trying to follow up on.

So –it was time for a bit of research. It seems that some time ago, shortly after being elected, Cllr. Fletcher set up a company and did a wee bit of consultancy work (for about £7,000) for Carlton Rock. There was talk of this not being declared during a potentially related council vote. Nothing came of it – but it made headlines. But this story came out of left field for me. If I thought that was out of the blue, there was more to come.

(VIII) Well. The last thing I expected in my dealings with Neil Fletcher was for him to bring up Cllr. Willie Young. It was something of a shock I must say. What I did to raise Cllr. Young is beyond me.

(IX) It looks as if Neil Fletcher is implying that Labour councillors are wrong to have changed their minds over the tree situation.

I can’t find a single record of Labour councillors saying ‘we need to kill the Tullos Deer’ – it looked as if they were trying to find an alternative, even when the blackmail money was first mooted. If Labour is going back on the idea of the tree planting – it may be for two reasons. One – the overwhelming evidence now out in the open that the plan is deeply, deeply flawed – and that relevant material was not made public until after the consultation closed.

The other reason is they may be sensitive to the thousands who have signed petitions and sent letters begging for the cull to be averted and humane deer control methods to be used – and expressing the view that Tullos Hill is not the best location for tree planting. If Labour have indeed ‘done somersaults’ and are on the side of the people – I fail to see what’s wrong with that.

Sorry to have been so long-winded – but this is information Aberdeen voters and citizens should be made party to.

When the results of my complaint about Councillor Fletcher’s email are made known – I will write on this subject again.

Apr 292011
 

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.

It was yet another event-packed week in Aberdeen. Some of us hunted for Easter eggs while the SNP, Greens and Labour were outside Marks & Spencers on Union Street Saturday, hunting for votes.

The public square outside of M&S served as an ‘exciting, vibrant hub in the heart of the City’ where people could come together – and it didn’t even cost £140 million to create. Not quite enough concrete there, though.

Anyway, the Friends of UTG and the anti-deer cull lobby spoke to the assembled politicians and passers-by and generated a great deal of interest.

On the other hand, the (not very) Liberal (not really) Democrats were conspicuous by their total absence on the day.  Whatever party you can from, whatever cause you support – everyone was in agreement that Councillor West of the SNP was the life and soul of the party. Who could forget his warm smile, beard, black suit and friendly banter as he offered all comers a bright yellow SNP balloon?

The SNP balloon is filled with hot air, and is likely to burst sometime in the near future, probably on 5 May. Perhaps the LibDems were right to stay away – their popularity might have caused a riot.  However, at the time of writing on Monday 25th April, there is no sign in the Press & Journal that such lively debate, lobbying and protesting ever took place concerning UTG and the deer.

The night before I stayed up all night to watch the skies for a meteor shower (not much joy really,- just wound up very tired Saturday), caused by Comet Thatcher. If I understand the science correctly, the frozen, lifeless Thatcher left a massive trail of debris which we will all still experience for generations to come. I’m sure there is some kind of metaphor in this somewhere but I can’t think what it might be.

Just one last thing – I owe a sincere apology to XXXXXXXXXXXX about my having XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX. I am truly sorry; it was very very much out of character, honestly don’t know what possessed me, and I obviously promise never to XXXXXXXXXXXXXX   XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX again. I have taken out a super injunction against myself, and will never mention XXXXXXXXXXXXXX again. Mea maxima culpa.  I will have one fewer BrewDog this coming weekend than last. Well, maybe not – it’s down to London to see some old friends; apparently there is some big wedding on as well.

Now that that is all cleared up, onwards with a few more terms to define.

Innocent:

(adj – Great Britain) freedom from guilt or blame, not culpable.
(adj – USA) – suspicious, dangerous; a state of being which deserves incarceration without trial, redress, or contact with the outside world – which would normally be guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

I mean, without Guantanamo, how else would we have found all of those Weapons of Mass Destruction?

After over seven years of detention in Guantanamo Bay for hundreds, it seems the United States, land of the free and home of the brave, might just have to admit to keeping innocent people locked up in Guantanamo. Files have surfaced which seem to show that about 220 of the enemy combatants’ (or ‘people’ to you and me) were classed as dangerous terrorists but some 150 were innocent.

The rest of the world recognised this from day one of the camp’s creation and the American refusal to allow legal representtaives in but the US was deaf to international pleas for mercy, basic human rights and the rule of law to prevail.

Dear George ‘Dubya’ Bush was largely behind the camp’s existence and he and his aides came up with the strategy of calling the Guantanamo captives ‘enemy combatants;’ this was unique for two reasons: Firstly,  such a preposterous legal concept had never before been used. Secondly, no one thought Bush could manage a phrase with that many syllables.

Old Susannah might have tried to define a few tricky terms in the past but I’m not touching ‘enemy combatant’ with a bargepole.  I don’t have a bargepole.

Guantanamo did manage to release some of the blatantly blame-free over the years and with their emergence emerged tales of degradation, abuse, suicide attempts, physical and mental torture.  But if you’re innocent, you’ve got to accept this kind of thing.  Most of the inmates were guilty of being in Afghanistan or Pakistan at some time or other, so there you go.

Let us not forget:  if you want to preserve Democracy and Freedom, you’ve got to lock up a few ‘folk’ and torture them now and then.  I mean, without Guantanamo, how else would we have found all of those Weapons of Mass Destruction?  Remember, it’s not torture when the ‘good guys’ are doing it – it’s ‘persuasion’. Of course, it could never happen here (we just let the US use our airspace when moving these people around on the way to be ‘persuaded’).

Bats:

(noun) protected species of rodent with flight capabilities; habitats of which are under threat.
(adj) slang for slightly crazy or unbalanced.

Scottish Natural Heritage sent me a letter ages ago, when plans for building in Union Terrace Gardens were first brought up, mentioning the presence of important birds and bats.

these guards sadly have ‘visual impact’ per our city experts, who  apparently prefer the visual impact of a suffering or dead animal

I understand from ‘moles’ in Union Terrace Gardens that the bats have been seen on recent evenings within the park.  It would be an awful shame if the presence of an EU-protected species of animal put any brakes on plans to build (another) shopping area in Aberdeen. Still, bats haven’t managed to stall plans for Loirston becoming home to a giant, glowing football stadium.

Other old bats can be found hanging around other city-centre buildings, particularly around the Marischal and St Nicholas areas. Many of these are of the blood-sucking variety, and should be avoided at all costs. Some are undoubtedly rabid.

‘Humane Cull’:

(noun) a way of killing something – such as a deer – whereby you need not feel too badly about it, particularly when the killing is wholly avoidable; the use of ‘experts’ to remove life in a sharing, caring, ‘humane’ kind of way. The feel-good factor in destruction.

We are soon to have a cull (unless someone wants their political career to continue) of an unspecified number of the Tullos Hill Roe Deer, over an unspecified number of years. Cheaper than the tree guards which are successfully in use in Loirston Loch and Kincorth Hill – but these guards sadly have ‘visual impact’ per our city experts, who  apparently prefer the visual impact of a suffering or dead animal.

But don’t lose any sleep, councillors – it is going to be a ‘humane cull.’  Ms Malone and others might want you to think some sharpshooters pull a trigger and an animal will die within seconds. I would hate to burst anyone’s balloon (except Malone’s and West’s), but this is what will happen to at least some of the deer…

I quote from a website called ‘bluestar hunting – www.bluestar-hunting.com/bloodinmotion.html
Sensitive souls may wish to look away now.  Here are some quotes:-

* ” Pay attention to the reaction of the animal when it is shot… I have had many hunters tell me that they knocked the animal down, only to watch it suddenly jump up and run off, leaving lots of blood.  This is the one that I hate to hear the most.  First of all, body shots that do not impact the neck or spine rarely make an animal drop, and if the neck or spine is hit, the animal is usually disabled and cannot get up..”

*  “The falling down likely means the leg was broken; lots of blood usually indicates a muscle hit.  Muscle damage leaves lots of blood in the first 100 yards… if it was a lung hit, it can take time for the body cavity to fill and blood to be forced out.  Animals may run in the beginning… this will cause blood trains to be harder to see…

*  “A liver shot is always fatal… but it will most likely take until the next day or later for the deer to die…. the double lung shot is the best percentage shot to take, as it will cause massive internal bleeding and drowning, causing death within about 150 yards… the pattern will start out with little blood, but it will increase as the  animal starts blowing blood out the mouth and nose…”

And my personal favourite:

*  “Give the animal time to bleed out before  you start tracking…. I have found animals within 40 or 50 yards of the stand, where they died after having run 250 to 300 yards in a long arcing circle, trying to get back to the spot they were safe in before the shot.”

(This could be why I prefer taking pictures of wildlife rather than blasting it to a slow death).

All the while, the wounded animal is in total shock, indescribable pain,and complete and utter terror as it dies, either a fairly quick ‘humane’ death or the slow one.  It is safe to assume that at least some of the deer – some of which are pregnant – will get this latter, long, terrifying, agonising death.

No wonder Scottish Natural Heritage wanted the city to manage the news of the cull carefully.  Not everyone is down with this  ‘humane cull’ reality.  Someone send a copy of ‘Bambi’ to Ms Malone, thanks.

NB – the Deer now have about 11 days – and Councillor Malone has about 3 to call it off.

______________________________________________________________

PS – Strictly confidential:

Grate a strong smelling soap around your plant beds. Some people will also tie soap bars to trees and bushes to keep deer away from a specific plant.

Sprinkle a mixture of red and black pepper, garlic and curry powder on and around plants deer like to eat to keep them away from your garden. Since this mixture will disappear when it rains, be sure to spread it out again after rain storms or after heavy watering sessions.

Try mixing a beaten egg with water and spraying on plants and around flower beds to keep deer away from your garden. Again, this will have to be reapplied after rains or heavy watering.

Use a commercial deer-repellent such as Deer-Off or Deer-Away. You can also try drops of animal urine such as coyote in your gardening beds. Some people report that human urine can work as well.

Plant plants deer won’t eat such as Lady’s Mantle, Butterfly Weed, Foxglove, St. John’s Wort, Lavender, Daffodil, Poppy and most pungent herbs.

Sprinkle human hair around your planting beds. Ask your hairdresser or a barber to save you a large bag next time you go in for your haircut.

Put a fence around your property to keep deer out. Some people have luck with tying white plastic shopping bags on the fence every couple of feet. The noise and movement of the plastic bags seems to scare deer and keep them away. A variation on the fence is to try a deer protection net. These nets are less obvious than a fence and may be more aesthetically pleasing to your garden.

______________________________________________________________

Next week – more definitions, outcome of the deer situation, and previously-promised news on Freedom of Information

Apr 292011
 

By Dave Watt.

Democracy – The belief in freedom and equality between people, or a system of government based on this belief, in which power is either held by elected representatives or directly by the people themselves. The Cambridge Online Dictionary

Democracy is one of our modern society’s buzzwords and we all nowadays accept it as a given that stable communities should be free and democratic.
Democracy to us is a positive concept but in our history it is only in the last hundred and fifty years or so that Britain has embraced the idea of democracy.

Previous to this it was regarded, particularly by our rulers as being neither more nor less than rule by a howling mob.

It is, in fact, less than eighty-five years since women over 21 were allowed to vote and less than 100 years since august journals such as the Times’ editorial announced that:

The suffragettes are a regrettable by-product of our civilisation, out with their hammers and their bags full of stones because of dreary, empty lives and highstrung, over-excitable natures

About the same time, the good bit less august Daily Sketch , declared that:

“The name of a suffragette will stink throughout recorded history”

Obviously tabloid journalism was alive and kicking the underdog even back in 1912.

One might think that having achieved universal adult suffrage in 1928 that Britain had been a full modern democracy since then. However, there were still such corrupt anomalies on the go as the businessman’s vote whereby a business owner was given a vote for each shop or establishment he owned as well as a vote for his home address.

In addition, the gerrymandering of votes in Northern Ireland by the Protestant Establishment ensured that the native Catholic population was continually on the wrong end of the electoral process. In fact, one Protestant businessman actually had forty-three votes and although this was an extreme case, many of Ulster’s ruling Protestant elite had multiple votes until the Irish Civil Rights Movement of the mid 1960s.

However, here we are in the twenty-first century with universal suffrage for those over eighteen, nobody asks your religion when you turn up at the polling station and we would regard anyone campaigning to curtail women’s voting rights as being something of a loose screw.

In addition, the candidate will spend large chunks of their working week in Parliament and nowhere near the constituency in question

So, do we live in a democracy where one person’s vote is worth the same as another’s? Unfortunately not. If you live in a key marginal constituency – you will get an inordinate amount of media coverage, assorted party leaders will turn up and tell you and you fellow voters what a fine, discerning, intelligent electorate you are.

Your vote will be sought after by phone and occasionally by canvasser and you will be generally coaxed, cajoled and pleaded with to vote for Party A over Party B or vice versa.

However, if you live in a firmly committed area where they simply weigh the vote for Party A or B you will be largely ignored apart from the usual leaflets and the odd party political broadcast. The committed voter, like the poor, is always with us and, like the poor, can be safely ignored by any astute politician on the make.

Voting Systems – There are several types of voting system. The most common in Britain is First Past the Post (or FPTP). This is where a people in an electoral constituency vote for one candidate to represent that constituency. While this is ostensibly fair it is deeply flawed, as the list below will show by a specimen election result.

Aberdeen East

Total Electorate in Constituency 50,000 voters

Candidate A (Longer Sticks on Lollipops Party) 13,000 votes

Candidate B (Shorter Sticks on Lollipops Party) 12,000 votes

Candidate C (Don’t Waste Precious Wood on Lollipop Sticks Party) 10,000 votes

Candidate D (It’s a Bloody Shame the Poor Can’t Afford Lollipops Party) 5,000 votes

Turn out 80%

As you can see from this, although the Longer Sticks on Lollipops Party have won the seat they represent less than a third of the votes cast and in parliament will actually be representing the wishes of just over one fifth of the electorate despite a massive 80% turn out.

this is not much cop when it comes to electing people who are willing to represent the public’s interests

Consequently, bearing in mind that it would be a bold back-bencher indeed who would stand against the wishes of his political overlords (and their pet lobbyists) it looks like the poor voters in Aberdeen East better get bloody used to having longer sticks on their lollipops for the foreseeable future.

The defenders of this system frequently mump on about how important it is to have constituency member of parliament who will be dedicated to that area alone and will be accessible to its residents – obviously forgetting that candidates are more than occasionally parachuted in as a constituency candidate from outwith the area and that most MPs or MSPs will actually be able to answer a phone, read a letter or an e-mail while the brighter ones will even have learned how to read texts on their Blackberry.

In addition, the candidate will spend large chunks of their working week in Parliament and nowhere near the constituency in question.

The next style of voting system is the Single Transferable Vote (or STV) which I have been obliged to do the tedious arithmetic for on several occasions and the details of which I will not go into here, as you would be fast asleep by the time I had finished (if you aren’t already). Suffice it to say that each voter gets several votes and lists them in preference order and the lowest voted candidate is removed then the next etc. until one of the top few are elected.

This is probably more democratic than first past the post but is probably best suited for choosing your student representative when you’re at university than a political contest. This is used in local council elections, so you can see by recent events in Aberdeen that this is not much cop when it comes to electing people who are willing to represent the public’s interests but mainly keeps the same old faces in power while pretending to be a bit more democratic.

There was a move afoot after 2003 to have this system replace the Parliamentary List System – presumably by those in Holyrood who objected to having their cosy little club invaded by a crowd of Greens and Socialists in that year.

The Parliamentary List System (or Regional Ballot) is probably the most democratic of the systems at present in use in the UK but is only used in Scotland and Wales.

It’s democratic and it’s simple and most countries in Western Europe use it and have been using it for over fifty years

The principle behind the list system is that the voters second vote is for a political party within a larger electoral area known as a region. (A region is formed by grouping together between eight and ten constituencies.) There are eight Scottish Parliament regions and each region has seven additional seats in the Parliament.

The MSPs chosen to fill these 56 additional seats are known as regional MSPs. Regional MSPs are allocated seats using a formula which takes into account the number of constituency seats that an individual or party has already won.

However, the outright winner in any serious democracy contest would undoubtedly be Proportional Representation (PR), which is remarkably simple whereby every one in the country votes and all the votes are added up, and each party is allocated seats in the parliament according to the percentage of the votes they have been given. It’s democratic and it’s simple and most countries in Western Europe use it and have been using it for over fifty years.

Why don’t we? Mostly it is more of the previous objection to the aforesaid cosy little club being invaded by those pesky troublemaking Green and Socialist radicals who are presumably closed to the blandishments of the lobbyists, who infest the corridors of power like poisonous termites, busily undermining the democratic process for big business interests.

Voting
Despite the title of Ken Livingstone’s 1987 book pointing out:‘If Voting Changed Anything They’d Abolish It’, Should you bother to vote? Yes, you probably should, ideally. An awful lot of people fought an awful long time to get you a vote so you should probably get down there and stick that cross down. You never know.

From their point of view an oppressive Conservative government got into power in 1979 and has stayed there ever since

One day the electorate might get it right and we might find ourselves with a government that cares for the old, sick and impoverished, has everybody in a house and a job, doesn’t send poor kids from depressed areas off to kill other people’s kids for oil and profit and cares for the environment. You never know.

Who does vote and who doesn’t vote?
Affluent people tend to vote and the poorer people seem not to. Figures in Scotland show that there can be up to a 15-20% difference in voting figures between poorer and richer neighbourhoods even within the same constituency on occasions.

Why is this? Basically what the underprivileged have seen for the past thirty years is an ongoing attack on their quality of life by a succession of right wing free market supporting governments. From their point of view an oppressive Conservative government got into power in 1979 and has stayed there ever since. Consequently, their disenchantment with government and the democratic process has meant that this has taken a back seat to the struggle for a decent life.

In addition, with the advent of the Poll Tax, which was effectively a Sod-The-Poor-Tax many people on the poorer end of society became disenfranchised and simply dropped off the electoral roll by simply being unable to afford to pay the Poll Tax. Its replacement by the almost-as-unfair-Council Tax has obviously not induced these people to get back on the electoral roll.

From an electoral view the parties which have traditionally suffered most from this, have been the socialists who have considerably more support within the poorer sections of society but owing to this disillusion and the aforementioned virtual disenfranchisement have been consistently punching below their weight at election time. Even when they are doing well (and don’t have their hands round each other’s throats, vigorously choking the electoral life out of each other as the SSP and Solidarity are doing at present) this factor reduces their electoral impact.

Who pays for a political party’s election funds?
There is a strange sideways jump in public morality about election funding. To keep it simple: large financial concerns of various kinds will bankroll political certain parties election funding on the expectation that when the party gets into power then the large financial concern can reasonably expect the party in government to enact legislation which will increase their profitability. They are seldom disappointed in this.

Needless to say, whereas this would be regarded as mere bribery and corruption in everyday life, in politics it is just regarded as the norm. For example, Abraham Lincoln, on being elected back in 1861, discovered his Republican party had promised enormous and unrealistic concessions to so many business concerns that, being quizzed a few weeks after the election as to why he was looking so glum, famously replied that “There’s just too many pigs for the teats”.

The Last Word on Democracy
When I was a kid there was a series on TV about an idealistic young US senator which had an impressive voice over at the start, which said:

Democracy is a bad form of government…but all the others are so much worse“.

Something to think about anyway.