Feb 232012
 

What a week it’s been for Old Susannah. The pizza party that never was,  PR wars and public accusaltion of criminal activity.  Where to start? And where is it all going? By Suzanne Kelly.

According to the Press & Journal of 21 February, Tom Smith of ACSEF claims to be the victim of internet ‘bullying… harassment… intimidation’ and so on.  The nature of the claims are not spelled out, but allegations are made of an ‘objectionable’ image (no, not one of the ‘concept’ drawings of the Granite Web), e-mail hacking and receipt of abusive emails.

Smith has called in the police.  It seems those he accuses of this broad spectrum collection of attacks are the broader spectrum of people opposed to building in Union Terrace Gardens.

Hacking is illegal.  Threatening is illegal.  When it comes to posting threatening remarks on internet sites, the law still applies.   But we are in a democracy which prides itself on centuries of press freedoms. 

The British Isles may truly be called the birthplace of political satire, a recognised and legitimate weapon of the press, often the only means of attacking people of wealth and power who might otherwise escape scrutiny.

The press has been filled with accounts of the nefarious activities in days not long past at News International.  Police have been bribed; phones of murder victims have been hacked, private correspondence has been intercepted.   The offenses are both shocking and illegal.   Elsewhere online,  threats are issued back and forth; the cloak of anonymity is often mis-used for the benefit of the coward or the manipulative.   As unpleasant as some online banter may be, not all of it is illegal by a wide margin:  the P&J know this extremely well.

If Mr Tom Smith and/or his family have had any bona fide threats (whether electronic or not), or if Mr Smith has been illegally hacked, then I will be the first to defend his rights and demand an enquiry.  (Note:  did you know that council officials can get court orders to snoop on residents for a variety of reasons?  If not, you know now).

However, there are several issues arising from this Press & Journal story which need to be dissected.

From the P&J, the blur between the allegedly illegal and the legal is as blurry as the specific details of the City Garden Project itself.

The timing of this claim comes close to the end of the referendum voting period – Mr Smith seems in the article in question to be making a blanket-bombing attack on all those who oppose the plans to build over Union Terrace Gardens.  I can assure Mr Smith that there was never a looser or more informal federation of people opposed to the City Gardens Project.

Why do he and the P&J feel the need to group political parties, grass-roots movements, students, OAPS, rich and poor into a single entity that is apparently illegally attacking him?

I am keen to hear the specifics of the accusation.  Perhaps Mr Smith is accustomed in his very many roles (1. ACSEF Chairman, 2. City Gardens Project Management Board, 3. City Gardens  Implementation Team Chair,  4. City Gardens Project Advisory Group, and  5. Director of Aberdeen City Gardens Trust) to only being treated with deference.  In social network sites; on newspaper comment pages, there is no automatic right to be treated politely.

Not everyone uses genteel language; one person’s foul language is another’s common vernacular.  What is the specific nature of the abuse(s) being claimed?  From the P&J, the blur between the allegedly illegal and the legal is as blurry as the specific details of the City Garden Project itself.

It is refreshing as well as amusing in the extreme to see the Press & Journal showing such concern to those ‘bullied and/or intimidated’ via internet:  readers of its online comments will be familiar with the abusive, bullying, personal, crude tactics of two of its most prolific, rarely censored anonymous posters, Jock W and the even more notorious Sasha M.

Months ago Sasha M made comments about me which were libellous in my (and my legal advisor’s opinion).  I complained and considered whether or not to sue; the editor of the P&J called me and agreed to take the posts off.  As I reported at the time, the editor told me that since ‘you skate pretty close to the edge yourself, you have to be able to take it as well.’

I reminded him that I write a satirical column, and that if Sasha M writes something about me which appears on a site owned and controlled by the P&J, purporting to be a place for comments on news stories, Sasha’s postings  had better be true. (I suggested ridiculing my overly-large nose; that at least would have a grain of truth in it:  but Sasha had claimed two libels against me which were  published on the Press & Journal’s website as if they were factual.  They were not, and as such I considered them illegal).

But now it is time to look at the Press & Journal. Today’s article is a very odd creature.

I have been sent occasional searing, blistering  emails by those I have satirised.  My satirical subjects have been politicians who have voted to slash benefits, close schools, destroy greenbelt land, and who have been convicted of criminal acts.

I see my small satirical column as my only weapon against a public/private power structure  that, in my opinion, seems to wants to suck as much out of the taxpayer and give them as little in return as possible, while commissioning portraits of themselves, attending concerts and other events.

My writing is certainly not to everyone’s taste – but I am using the legal, accepted, platform called satire.  If I have successfully drawn attention to any injustice and/or incestuous public/private sector overlaps, then I’ve succeeded.  But in any event, I stay within the law, and will continue to write as long as I can find a reader.

But now it is time to look at the Press & Journal. Today’s article is a very odd creature.  It voices Mr Smith’s complaints – but it mixes illegal activity such as hacking and threats with totally legal (if undesired) activity such as online posts.  It stops short of accusing anyone of libel, but it hints at it.  What is the P&J actually trying to say is the subject of the police investigation?  Are the police roping together all internet items which offend Mr Smith – legal and illegal?  The P&J certainly seems to be doing so.

For quite some time P&J editorial staff have been aware of the over-the-top, racist, nationalistic, insulting behaviour (in the opinion of many) of some of its posters.  Mike Shepherd is only one target of Jock, Sasha and their vitriolic crew.  Mike and the others have not gone to the police as far as I know, but by Mr Smith’s standards they certainly would be within their rights to do so.  In reviewing randomly the writing of Jock and Sasha, I’ve come across highly offensive, possibly illegal posts including:-

*  references to ‘incomers’ in less than flattering contexts, which certainly sound nationalistic and insular and to some degree threatening to me

*  references to specific politicians such as Lewis MacDonald which are extremely insulting

* stereotyping of anyone suspected of left-leaning politics

*  a remark from Sasha:  ‘let’s kill off these protestors once and for all…’  not kill off the protest – but the actual people – the protestors.

*  Jock W invokes the Nazis in an insult directed towards Mike Shepherd  – Jock references ‘Goebbels’ and alludes to ‘Chemical Ali’ by way of typing ‘Comical Ali’.

Nazi related insults?  Threats to kill protestors?  What has been allowed on the Press & Journal online editions for all these past months? 

They are surely responsible for posts put on their website.  A feeble addition of links whereby readers can ask for a quote to be ‘reported’ is by no means a substitute for the responsibility the P&J have as the owners of this website.  I have had scores of people tell me they used these links to complain, all to no avail.

Clearly the P&J need to look at their own house.

The real point here though is that the Press & Journal knowingly allows this type of comment to go on, refuses to police its own comments pages, and yet has the gall to support Mr Smith in his complaints that people are being intimidating and bullying to him online, mixing illegal and legal activity in what seems like a very crude attempt to smear anyone who stands up against the City Gardens Project or those who support it.

A kind word to Aberdeen Journals:  things are changing.  Your circulation and profit margin are apparently not what they once were.  People are saying openly that you seem blatantly biased towards any hype the pro CGP teams throw at you.  Have you gone too far this time?  Just a thought.

I welcome any police investigation into any illegal activities – threatening people, hacking and so on.  Our police will be well aware of guidelines protecting free expression, satire and online comments.

One recent complaint I had threatened me with legal action and the Scottish Football Association (!)

If any attempt is made to curb, censor or halt normal rights of the individual, then this small writer through to the NUJ and all responsible news agencies will be there to safeguard our journalistic rights and day-to-day free expression.

In point of fact I am trying to make up my mind:  should I stand up to Sasha M and launch a suit against him and/or the Press & Journal now after all (don’t worry – I still have screen shots of Sasha’s remarks about me – in an item about the Lord Provost giving away expensive gifts which I neither commented on nor had any involvement with whatsoever)?

This could stop any further written threats to ‘kill protestors’ or nationalistic rhetoric about ‘incomers’.  For that matter – I thought the garden ramps project was to encourage newcomers to the area?  With Sasha’s rants against newcomers, this will indeed be hard work.

Back to my legal, online writing.  For every piece of fact I have written about, I can assure my detractors that I will have a source, and that source will be doubly – if not triply – backed up.  I have in the main while writing received many letters of support (for which I am sincerely grateful).

One recent complaint I had threatened me with legal action and the Scottish Football Association (!) if I did not print a retraction of my article.  Instead my source material was reviewed, not only fully vindicating my assertions, but also paving the way to printing further details the complainant may not have wanted publicised.

Finally, here is a nice way to illustrate these points, which I will call The Casablanca Gambit.

Classic Film readers will remember dialogue from the iconic (the word is well used in this case) film, ‘Casablanca’.  The Chief of Police in Casablanca, Captain Renault, has been ordered by Nazis to close Rick’s Cafe by any means.  This is what transpires:

Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds?
Captain Renault: I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!
[a croupier hands Renault a pile of money]
Croupier: Your winnings, sir.
Captain Renault: [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much.
Captain Renault: [aloud] Everybody out at once!

I leave it to you to decide who in this current Aberdeen drama are the Nazis, who is Rick, and who is Renault.  (I wonder if the P&J may wish to reconsider its position, or if it will continue to collect its winnings while it can).

Feb 162012
 

With thanks to Lewis MacDonald MSP.

North East Labour MSP Lewis Macdonald has called on Scottish Enterprise to maintain an impartial position in relation to proposals for building over Union Terrace Gardens, as city residents prepare to vote on whether to support the scheme.
Lewis Macdonald has written to Regional Director of Scottish Enterprise, Maggie McGinlay, seeking her assurances that she and the agency will not attempt to influence voters in the upcoming referendum on the proposed City Gardens Project.

Lewis Macdonald said today:

“The Scottish Government has indicated that it will consider the use of Tax Incremental Financing should the referendum indicate public support for the building over of Union Terrace Gardens. However, there is concern that this finance model is unsuitable as the City Gardens Project would not generate sufficient additional non-domestic rates income for the loan to be paid back.

“Whether to proceed with the City Gardens Project or not has become a very contentious issue in the city, and in light of these very reasonable concerns about the funding mechanism, it is crucial that publically accountable bodies, such as Scottish Enterprise, are impartial. That is why I have written to Maggie McGinlay for her assurance that Scottish Enterprise will not take a public view on this proposal, and that she will not do so either.

“Given the importance attached to the result of the referendum by both the city council and Scottish Ministers, it is essential that public bodies accountable to those ministers do not seek to influence the outcome of that referendum.”

Jan 072012
 

By Stephen Davy-Osborne, with thanks to David Forbes.

An Aberdeen charity is seeking all of your old aluminium cans to help them raise enough money to buy a much needed mini bus.

Future Choices Aberdeen was set up following the closure of the Choices Day Centre, which left a number of members of the community with nowhere to socialise in a safe and friendly environment.

The charity offers disabled people and their carers in Aberdeen opportunities to get involved in the community through a number of voluntary projects within the city.

They now desperately require much needed funds so that they can buy a minibus to allow them to get out and about in the city.

City carer David Forbes, 29, said:

“The Cash for Cans Appeal doesn’t ask for your money, it simply asks for your empty undamaged aluminium cans, which then can be used in exchange for cash to go towards getting the charity its dream.”

So far, the appeal has reached over 100 cans already and also received the backing from Dame Anne Begg MP, Lewis Macdonald MSP and many other local high profile individuals. Even local schools are getting on board this appeal.

To support the Cans for Cash Appeal, please donate any aluminium cans to:

The Stewart Craft Centre,
Unit 2,
Deemouth Business Centre
South Esplanade East,
Aberdeen, AB11 9PB,
 or alternatively to Lewis Macdonald MSP Office, 80 Rosemount Place, Aberdeen. AB25 2XN or call Mr Forbes on 07821700046 to arrange a pick-up.

Contact Aberdeen Charity, cash for cans appeal on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003294062956&ref=ts

Nov 172011
 

 By Mike Shepherd.

On Tuesday a Council committee voted to defer a decision on a referendum for the City Garden Project to the full Council meeting on the 14th December.

Although an amendment was introduced to propose an opinion poll as an alternative, a vote for a referendum looks more likely.

If such a referendum was to happen it would be held either two months before or two months after the local council elections on May 3rd.

This is one of many setbacks to have affected the City Garden Project (CGP). Here is a summary of the problems facing the scheme:

The City Garden Project is way behind schedule:  It is almost exactly three years since Sir Ian Wood announced his Civic Square proposal at His Majesty’s Theatre on the 11th November 2008. Although we are close to seeing a final design, the project is nowhere near planning submission and funding is very uncertain.

The vote on Tuesday looks to introduce further delays. It also probably shunts the planning decision well into the next Council, when at least one of the proponents of the scheme, John Stewart, will not be on the Council any more, having announced that he will stand down.

The City Garden Project is unpopular: This statement gets vigorously challenged by supporters of the CGP, yet it is clearly the case. The consultation held two years ago saw a ‘no’ vote for the CGP, and various online polls have shown a consistent numerical advantage to those wanting to keep the existing Gardens. The probability is that a referendum would reject the CGP.

The Design Exhibition failed to create any buzz in the city: The Friends of Union Terrace Gardens canvassed opinion outside the exhibition while it lasted. About half of those we talked to were unhappy about the designs. Many spoiled their votes.( by attempting to vote for the non-existent ‘option 7’.) Of those that voted, a common vote was for a design that appeared to preserve the Gardens (it doesn’t), although they reported they did this without much enthusiasm.

The land issue is a headache for the Council lawyers: Union Terrace Gardens lies on Common Good land and any land transaction, i.e. assigning a long term lease to a limited company or trust, would probably require an application to a court of session to apply for a change in status of the property.

The Council lawyers are well aware of the legal pitfalls that could ensue over the details of a property transaction (as witness the pending court case between Aberdeen Council and the Stewart Milne Group).

it involves the allocation of scarce public money using non-economic criteria

Currently,Union Terrace Gardens has negligible value as it is zoned as public open green space in the local plan.  However, should this status change at a later date and the property is re-zoned as commercial space, the land value will be in the tens of millions as prime down-town real estate.

The lawyers will have to be especially careful on this issue, particularly where a long term free-hold lease could potentially be assigned to a limited company.

Funding the City Garden Project is a big problem:  To date only £55M of private money has been pledged for a project nominally costing £140M. The CGP are pushing the Council to underwrite a loan of £70M through Tax Incremental Financing (TIF) to help part fund the scheme.

Aberdeen Council’s business case was so feeble it didn’t even rank in the top six schemes assessed for recommendation by the Scottish Futures Trust. Even so, the Scottish Government Cabinet Secretary for Infrastructure and Capital Investment, Alex Neil, has told Aberdeen Council that their TIF application may still be considered. However, the TIF would be awarded on a ‘geographical’ basis rather than an ostensibly ‘economic’ basis.

This can be criticised as very poor Government practice; it involves the allocation of scarce public money using non-economic criteria. It also begs the question that if the business case doesn’t stack up, why is the debt-ridden Aberdeen Council under consideration to be allowed to borrow money for it?

Questions are being asked in Holyrood about Aberdeen’s TIF funding. This is from an article by Steven Vass in last weekend’s Sunday Herald:

“First Minister Alex Salmond’s decision to permit Aberdeen’s £70M borrowing plan for redesigning the city centre will come under renewed fire when he is forced to answer questions in the Scottish Parliament this week.

“Lewis MacDonald, the Aberdeen MSP and long-time opponent of the scheme, said there was a “scandal lurking under the surface” around the permission. He has tabled a series of parliamentary questions demanding answers to speculation the Government’s approval overruled the economic advice of specialists at the Scottish Futures Trust, who were supposed to decide which projects would go ahead.”

Another potential show-stopper is that last year the Council decreed that borrowing money through a TIF scheme must present ‘zero risk’ to the Councils finances.  The only realistic way this could happen is if an organisation or individual was prepared to underwrite the Council loan.

This would be a major commitment to say the least, as it would involve underwriting £70M for a 25 to 30 year period. Perhaps Sir Ian Wood is willing to do this, but even for him or his family trust, it would involve a significant allocation of capital resources over a long term period.

Add to this the question of cost over-run. One architect told me this week that with the massive rock excavation operation involved and the difficulties of building over the railway line, there was no way of this project coming in on budget. Yet, very little has been said about what would happen if the costs do over-run massively.

The problems are stacking up for the City Garden Project and even three years later they are not much closer to being resolved. The patient is looking sickly and the prognosis is not good.

Aug 242011
 

It has been a busy summer down at Sunnybank Park. Philip Sim reports.

Just six months have passed since the park, formerly known as the St Machar Outdoor Centre, was taken over by the Friends of Sunnybank Park community group.

Already, major structural changes are underway to breathe new life into the previously run-down site, with the newly-built allotments looking full of life.

One of the most visually impacting changes has been the removal of the large metal fence across the middle of the park, which has made the whole area feel much more open and spacious.

The fence removal was funded by Aberdeen Greenspace Trust, who have pledged around £60,000 to the park. They have now completed the bulk of their work, including re-surfacing the existing paths and installing some benches and a new stairway and path leading to the park.

  

Sunnybank Park Update: July from Philip Sim on Vimeo.

Meanwhile BTCV Scotland volunteers have also been hard at work picking litter, building benches and trimming down the undergrowth. They have also built compost bins for the allotment holders and other green-fingered locals.

There has even been some political interest in the project. Former City Council leader John Stewart has provided funds for signage and a notice board, while North East MSP Lewis MacDonald toured the site last week.

The park was formerly home to a bowling green, but Aberdeen City Council decided to mothball the site after the pavilion was burned down in 2009.

The area was left to fall into disrepair until local community groups rallied round and put together a business plan, complete with funding, to save the park. With many major developments now complete and a few more still to come, the future certainly seems bright at Sunnybank Park.

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.

Apr 292011
 

7 months on from gathering comments from the Scottish Party Leaders on the development of Union Terrace Gardens, Mike Shepherd enlightens readers as regards where the parties stand 7 days ahead of the Scottish Election.

no images were found

CONSERVATIVES: Mixed views. The Conservatives in the council split last year, and the city centre park was one of the contentious issues leading to the split.

One of the splinter groups supported the development; the other has major concerns about the financial exposure to the Council of borrowing money to build the city square.

The Conservative candidate in Central Aberdeen, Sandy Wallace, supports the development of the park:

“21st century public space over 19st century public space is a no brainer. The question is can we afford it? We should make sure we can afford it. Building for our grandchildren’s future takes preference over employing yet more council officials.”

GREEN PARTY: Against the development of Union Terrace Gardens. In an Aberdeen Voice article, leader of the Scottish Greens, Patrick Harvie said:

“The Greens both loc­ally and nation­ally fully sup­port the cam­paign to retain the his­toric Union Ter­race Gar­dens in their cur­rent form. The people of Aber­deen were con­sul­ted and rejec­ted the pro­posal: it is shame­ful for the City Coun­cil and busi­ness to try to over­turn that outcome.”

See: https://aberdeenvoice.com/2010/09/scottish-party-leaders-comment-on-utg/

LABOUR: Against the development of the city centre park. Lewis Macdonald, the sitting MSP in the marginal Aberdeen Central constituency, has highlighted the issue in one of his election leaflets. In this, he pledges to oppose plans to fill in the Gardens:

“The people of Aberdeen should have the final say in what is done with Union Terrace Gardens.”

no images were found

LIBERAL-DEMOCRATS: Mixed views. In the Council group, Council leader John Stewart is the prime mover for the City Garden project when votes come up. He is also on the board for the City Garden project and is helping to progress the plans. On the other hand, Councillor Martin Greig  and several Lib-Dem colleagues are consistent opponents of the scheme in council debates.

SCOTTISH NATIONAL PARTY: The main supporters of the City Garden Project, although largely silent on the issue in their current campaign. Kevin Stewart, a strong contender for the marginal Aberdeen Central seat, is also on the board for the City Garden Project. He has led most of his Councillors in support for the city square in council voting and this is one of the main reasons why it has progressed through the Council to date.

Alex Salmond was quoted in Aberdeen Voice last year:

“Aber­deen City coun­cillors voted in favour of the pro­pos­als to build a new City Square and I under­stand a design com­pet­i­tion is under­way, which will seek the views of local cit­izens, as to what the devel­op­ment will look like.

It strikes me that in these tough eco­nomic times there is all the more reason to think big for the future of the North-East of Scot­land. We should be excited by the scale of this vis­ion and the com­mit­ment to ensure great things can be made to happen.”

See: https://aberdeenvoice.com/2010/09/scottish-party-leaders-comment-on-utg/

 

Mar 252011
 

Happy 9-month birthday to Aberdeen Voice!  And Old Susannah’s column has now been running for 6 months.

I was having a quick lemonade with Fred Wilkinson (or ‘Freditor-in-Chief’ as I call him) and he explained how the Voice was born.  He was talking to friends, and they were discussing whether it was possible to create as great, impartial, investigative and intelligent a newspaper as the ones we already have in Aberdeen, and they decided to give it a go.

Nine months later, there are dozens of contributors and thousands of readers – but no advertisers the Voice is beholden to.

There are three things I particularly love about the Voice itself.

  • The first is that absolutely anyone who has something reasonable and coherent to say is welcome to submit an article.
  • The second is the stories the Voice has broken.  For instance, when Trump’s organisation explained to the world’s media that they never considered the use of compulsory purchase orders at Menie, Voice  published an excellent article proving this simply was not the case.

When Councillor Malone told the Press & Journal that only ‘about one’ Aberdeen resident contacted her objecting to the deer cull, the Voice’s readers sent in proof to the contrary in spades.  And while the Union Terrace Gardens situation gets murkier and more confusing by the minute, the Voice breaks important developments that that are not covered in other local press publications….. for some reason.

  • The Third great thing about Aberdeen Voice to me is the growing number of readers that are getting involved.  People are writing in to the  Voice for more information, contacting their elected officials on matters featured in the Voice, and are writing to Voice contributors with important leads, comments and very kind words of encouragement.

Then there are the people who make the Voice a reality.  First there is Fred Wilkinson (or ‘Dave’ or ‘Wilkinson’ as Councillor Malone calls him), the editor-in-chief.  He has two teenage children, his band, and a host of other projects and yet he finds the time to bring all the contributions together, chase down delinquent sub editors and bring together edition after edition for publication on time, every week.

Mike Shepherd and Sarah-Jane Duffus are two of the leading Union Terrace Gardens writers and activists. Their energy and dedication to saving the city’s only centre park, not to mention probably the most valuable, irreplaceable and beautiful city centre civic asset in Aberdeen, is admirable.  It is no wonder that they have ACSEF worried and complaining publicly that the UTG Friends are ‘organised’. They bloody well are.

Rob is the Aberdeen Voice ‘tech guy’ who has a dozen or so of his own projects going, yet can show up to take amazingly high quality photos  on breaking stories with lightning speed.

I was honoured then and more so now to be part of this amazing group of people

He has the patience of several saints and continuously improves the technology behind the Voice; its growing readership has meant lots of work for Rob – who also has to try and get me up to speed with technical developments – not an easy task.

I also owe a debt of thanks to Rhonda Reekie, who writes on a variety of subjects.  Some six months ago she contacted me and wondered if I’d like to consider writing something for the Voice.  Well, six months on and I really must thank the Council and the Big business interests for continuously generating material to write about.  I was honoured then and more so now to be part of this amazing group of people and this much-needed and much-enjoyed electronic newspaper which is Aberdeen Voice.  Thanks.

I was sick for two weeks, during which the world has become overcome with problems from Libya to Japan.  Closer to home, the Scottish Parliament decides not to call in the Loirston Loch stadium plan (as one fellow objector put it, ‘I am surprised they had time to open the envelope, let alone weigh up the issues.”).

One minute we are to kill deer, then no, then yes. To make matters worse, it looks like Stewart Milne homes are losing money, as young would-be purchasers are having their mortgage applications rejected – home sales in the Milne Group may be down as much as 20%.  No wonder the poor man wants to increase parking costs at Pittodrie.  It’s more than Old Susannah can keep up with.

I was, however, very pleased when I heard about the lorry-load of cement that was dumped on Aberdeen’s roads; I thought it was a great way to fill in some of the potholes.  Sad to say, it turned out that this was a mistake, and not a cunning plan by our Council (well, it did sound like the kind of thing they might do).  When I finally got out of my sickbed, I was shocked to find that a pothole on Victoria Road had been filled in.

If you don’t do return your form, you will be deemed to have ‘taken leave of your census’ and may be fined.

This was also a bit sad for the locals, as we’d been planning on stocking this particular hole with trout.  The material filling the hole doesn’t appear to have been ‘tamped down’ at all, and it is of a completely different material than either the road or all the other patches.  I have every confidence it will last as long as the other road mends have done.  I give it two weeks.

Tuesday was busy – first it was the excellent Mark Edwards ‘Hard Rain’ exhibition and presentation at Aberdeen University. I fully recommend a visit to see the work which will be up for a month.  Immediately afterwards I raced to Peacock Visual Arts which hosted ‘Run Down Aberdeen’ – another excellent film by Fraser Denholm and Mike Shepherd.  I missed the film – which you can now get online – but was entertained by the panel discussion featuring Fraser, Councillors Martin Greig, Kevin Stewart, and Lewis MacDonald MSP.

The gallery was packed, including the area just outside the gallery.  I did get a chance to ask if there was any connection between Stewart Milne’s Triple Kirks plan and the desire to turn our Victorian garden into a parking lot.  I didn’t exactly get an answer.

Right, time to define some of the terms arising of late.  Apologies for the long intro.

Census (noun) A polling of individuals and householders, usually undertaking by governments, in order to aid future planning.

We are currently all receiving our Census forms, which must be returned by 27 March.  No doubt the post office will provide its usual swift service and not a single form will be lost.  If you don’t do return your form, you will be deemed to have ‘taken leave of your census’ and may be fined.

It is unfortunate that the population can no longer respond with “Jedi Knight” as an answer on the religion question

But you will, of course, want to reveal to the government every detail of your life, family, health, finances etc.  That’s how they keep giving us the great, forward-thinking services enjoyed today by the elderly, people with special needs, school children and the poor.  The number of bathrooms in your house is crucial to these calculations.

(Naturally all details will be kept strictly confidential – unlike all of the past instances of confidential information being left on trains, leaked or lost).

Aberdeen couldn’t be the great place it is if 10 years ago people hadn’t done their census forms.  It is just unfortunate that we’re closing our schools down while at the same time building new ‘affordable homes*’ on every patch of green that still exists.  I guess the Census back then must have said our population would quadruple.

It is unfortunate that the population can no longer respond with “Jedi Knight” as an answer on the religion question.  This is unfair discrimination against Jedi Knights, and just goes to prove that the dark side of the force is in control in Scotland.  Any resemblance between Ms Dean and an Imperial Storm Trooper (or one of those furry muppet alien squeaky things) might be more than coincidental.  May the Farce be with you – get those Census forms in.

*Affordable Housing (noun) dwelling places priced lower than fair market value, intended to benefit people with low incomes.

Are you a multimillionaire feeling the pinch?  Need to build some luxury des-res homes in the greenbelt (where there is no VAT to pay on the land) in a hurry and cheaply?  Need to convince those sceptical, uncooperative, incisive Councillors that new housing should be built rather than old buildings converted?  Well then, ‘affordable housing ‘ is your ticket to your next few million.

The local authorities will always give you planning permission anyway, but the phrase ‘affordable housing’ is music to their ears:  it will help them to justify the approval to build your unique, individualistic, state-of-the art homes where endangered species currently roam unchecked.

You’ll probably get a tax break for building ‘affordable homes’ as well.

There is dancing in the streets today as people rejoice over the 1p reduction in the price of motor fuel

What happens is this:  your development goes up, and you build say 2 to 4 ‘affordable homes .  The press tells the world what a great guy you are, and announces the date for the homes to be sold.  People then queue up on site to buy these bargains for days in advance of the sale.  The first few people get the homes, and move in to spend many happy years living in a luxurious new development.

None of these buyers will instantly sell their bargain property for a massive profit – that would be morally wrong and would defeat the purpose of ‘affordable housing’ in the first place.

Budget (noun) a set list of rules for fiscal expenditure.

In the UK the budget is set by established financial wizard and genius, George Osborne.

There is dancing in the streets today as people rejoice over the 1p reduction in the price of motor fuel. People can now fill their tanks for about 17p less than before.  What will you do with your 17p?  You could put it towards the cost of a drink, but it won’t  pay for the increased cost of your cigarettes (which you should really quit anyway – unless you’re immortal and super-rich).

The ‘coalition’ government was no doubt left with a huge mess to clean up, and bombing Libya will no doubt go a long way to helping us get back on our feet.  Or something.  We did after all sell Libya all those finely crafted, UK made handcuffs, riot gear, clubs and shackles – time to capitalise on the investment.

By bombing them, we’re making more money for UK Defence Contractors.  Result!

The old joke was ‘A capitalist is someone who will sell you the rope they are going to hang you with’.  The Libya situation is an interesting take on this sentiment. Clearly nothing is more important than British Jobs – and the idea of weapons large and small no longer being made in the UK is too much to bear.

The North Sea Oil industry will be stumping up an extra few pence in tax, and George Osborne has promised to close some of the tax loopholes exploited by the rich for decades.  I just hope none of our important, famous multi-millionaires are troubled by this budget.  Somehow, I doubt they will be.

Next week – more definitions and a look back at some of the Old Susannah outstanding issues

Run Down Aberdeen – A New Documentary

 Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Events, Featured, Information, Opinion  Comments Off on Run Down Aberdeen – A New Documentary
Mar 182011
 

By Fraser Denholm.

A new documentary, launched next week, takes a look beneath the layer of grime, which, in recent years, has coated the grand granite facades of Aberdeen’s unique city centre. Run Down Aberdeen seeks to highlight and investigate a number of issues which have, and continue to contribute to the current condition of the city, a number of issues which regular readers of Aberdeen Voice may be all too familiar.

In the short yet prolific life of  Aberdeen Voice, the city’s premier online outlet for citizen journalism and campaign writing, there have been a number of contentious issues which have attracted most of the site’s column inches. Controversial developments, urban decline, council mismanagement and the seemingly perpetual struggle between the public and private sectors have been the order of the day at Aberdeen Voice since its inception.

Framed around the widespread and growing state of perceived neglect, Run Down Aberdeen looks a little further than the chipped cornices, tarnished street plaques, empty shop units and grubby pavements which face the residents and visitors of Aberdeen. With the help of local politicians, writers and citizens, the film discusses both the historical and contemporary developments, which continue to shape the future of the city.

The documentary was commissioned as an expansion of a Facebook group which has already been  the  subject of an AV article by Mike Shepherd, the group’s founder and the film’s executive producer. While the group’s ethos is to encourage members of the general public to highlight areas of concern by posting photos, it seemed counterproductive to either echo this or make the film about what the group was achieving (A few weeks after the group’s establishment a number of the areas highlighted in the early photographs were tackled by Councillor Martin Greig).

Therefore the film, while establishing the apparent neglect, looks into initiatives proposed or already under way and how these developments will effect or remedy the situation.

Big ticket projects have been proposed which aim to be a universal panacea to Aberdeen’s decline: The City Square Project claims to safeguard jobs and economic stability while delivering “transformational” change to a “third rate” city centre; “One Aberdeen” the Aberdeen city development company is aimed at:

“maximising the use of the city’s unused assets and to drive and promote the regeneration and economic development of the city as a whole.”

While the Green Townscape Heritage Initiative seems successful in its attempts to regenerate the Green area of the city and working with a range of heritage organisations to restore the historic buildings and streetscapes.

On the other hand there is widespread dissatisfaction amongst the people of Aberdeen – the establishment of Aberdeen Voice is a prime example of this. Every day there are more and more protest and pressure groups within the city struggling with the City Council’s decisions and projects, which will affect their everyday lives.

But how do we consolidate this? How can a city regain its population’s faith once it has been lost? And what can the everyday person do to influence the city around them? And most importantly where does the future of a city like Aberdeen lie?

For forty years the city has apparently prospered on the back of a finite resource, and with that resource now dwindling and the corporations based in Aberdeen, who have been drawn to the city to exploit it getting itchy feet, how should the city move forward, and who exactly should define where to go?

Run Down Aberdeen Trailer from Fraser Denholm on Vimeo.

Run Down Aberdeen will premiere at Peacock Visual Arts on Tuesday 22nd March at 7pm.

The Screening will be followed by an open discussion chaired by Joan Ingram featuring the filmmaker, Lewis MacDonald MSP, Councillor Kevin Stewart and Councillor Martin Greig.