Feb 172012
 

Voice has learned that Aberdeen’s allotment holders may well be close to resolving their long- running dispute with Aberdeen City Council. The swingeing increases imposed in the Council’s 2008 and 2009 budgets have added 152% to bills in a 12 month period for some gardeners. With thanks to Frank Taylor.

Readers may recall that Finance Minister John Swinney confirmed to local MSP Dr Nanette Milne that a local authority would not be entitled to collect rent under regulations which had not been formally confirmed by Scottish Ministers in terms of the Allotment (Scotland) Act 1892.
Regulations made under this provision have no legal effect without ministerial confirmation.

Aberdeen City Council maintained that legally it can to choose whether or not to make regulations for its allotments. Allotment holders do not dispute this, but when the Council claims it has chosen not to make regulations, allotment holders do dispute this.

The allotment holders feel that irrespective of what the Council says it has chosen to do, it has in fact made regulations, but by choosing not to have them confirmed by ministers, the Council has no legal right to enforce these.

The dispute is now at the Sheriff Court as the Council has raised proceedings against Frank Taylor, secretary of Bucksburn Allotments Association. Mr Taylor eventually lost patience with the Council, withheld the rent for his allotments and challenged the Council to raise proceedings against him for recovery of rent and possession to allow the Court to clarify the issues.

Mr taylor told Voice that he did not encourage the Council to raise proceedings against him ‘without a great deal of thought and soul-searching’. There are extremely serious consequences for him should the Court find against him. He may have to surrender possession of his allotments and be found liable for the Council’s costs as well as his own.

He is, however, extremely confident in the merits of his arguments.

The term ‘regulations’ is not defined in the allotments legislation and it is a well-established legal principle in such circumstances, that an undefined word shall be interpreted according to its normal and ordinary meaning.

‘Regulation’ is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as ‘a rule or directive made and maintained by an authority’. Aberdeen City Council is a local authority.  So, has ACC made any rules for the management of its allotments?

Before being granted tenancy, Aberdeen allotment holders are required to indicate their acceptance of a list of conditions in the Council’s ‘Conditions of Let’ letter. Mr Taylor has provided us with a copy and points out that ‘rule’ is a synonym of ‘Condition’ in the Oxford Thesaurus of English.

That seems to put the issue beyond doubt, especially since the Council in its own Condition 9, refers to that condition as ‘a rule’.
To reinforce his views, Mr Taylor says it is evident that the conditions imposed upon him are used to

  1. Set the rent payable in terms of the contract and the date on which the initial rent is payable
  2. Make a direction as to when the rent shall be reviewed and the dates on which future rents shall be payable
  3. Govern the circumstances under which the landlord is entitled to resume possession
  4. Direct who shall be entitled to assess compensation to a tenant on outgo and restrict the right of any other person to input into that process
  5. Direct how the tenancy may be terminated by a tenant
  6. Restrict the entitlement of a tenant to transfer the tenancy
  7. Limit the use to which a tenant may put an allotment and restrict him/her from keeping livestock
  8. Regulate the dimensions and type of hut that a tenant may seek to erect and control where it may be situated
  9. Direct that a tenant may be removed if he does not achieve the required standard of husbandry.

The terms used – ‘manage’, ‘administer’, ‘set’, ‘govern’, ‘restrict’, ‘limit’, ‘direct’ and ‘control’ – are all synonyms of ‘regulate’. There is no doubt that every condition in the Conditions of Let letters regulates, or has the effect of regulating, matters pertaining to the management and administration of allotments owned and let by a local authority.

So has Aberdeen City Council made regulations for its allotments? Has the Council made a regulation by setting a rent? Will a Court disagree with Mr Taylor? He is confident of winning the case..

The Council’s Court Action has been founded on Conditions or an alleged breach thereof.  If the Court decides that these Conditions are Regulations, then the local authority’s Court Action will automatically fail.

Clock Ticking For Triple Kirks And The Peregrines

 Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion  Comments Off on Clock Ticking For Triple Kirks And The Peregrines
Mar 252011
 

In January 2011, Richard Pelling posted a blog entitled Triple Kirks Nonsultation?’ about what was going on at The Triple Kirks site. At this stage, the plans for the site had already been subject to intense local criticism, inspired a poem and had even received a bit of a national mauling in Private Eye (Eye 1279, page 16). Richard now brings us up to date.

In February,  Stewart Milne Group (SMG) submitted an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) screening option request to determine if they would need to carry out an EIA prior to submitting plans – to which we of course made comment.

It turns out that given that the site is less than 0.5 hectares in size and “does not fall within a sensitive area”,  no EIA is required.

So, the presence of the Schedule 1 listed Peregrine Falcons on site apparently does not merit any special attention and no study of the potential impact on them is required. Sad.

While on the subject of the majestic Peregrine, it is worth pointing out that the registered address of SMG is, ironically, Peregrine House in Westhill. Want more irony? Of course you do! One of the items cited in the Corporate Social Responsibility section of the SMG website is Protecting our Native Birds.

With the pesky matter of the requirement for an EIA out of the way, the plans for the proposed development were duly submitted to Aberdeen City Council in March.

Now on the aforementioned Corporate Social Responsibility section of the SMG website, I was pleased to read the following :

“Protecting our Heritage – Historic buildings are a vital part of this nation’s heritage, and one particularly close to our heart”.

So in line with this statement, would the final plans represent a volt face, meaning that Archibald Simpson’s Triple Kirks site would be treated in a sympathetic manner? Would the soaring A-listed spire now be afforded the respect it deserves? Nae chance. Perusal of the application on-line – P110303 – reveals that they look remarkably similar to those being peddled during the nonsultation exercise – quelle surprise.

Surely the site deserves more than the bland and insipid glazed shed that that some would say desecrates the Triple Kirks site and detracts from the surrounding historic streetscape? Why bother to give a building A-listed status if it can be treated with such disregard? Please check out the plans and then make your comments on the application – you have until 31st March 2011 to do this.

Remember that if you commented in the initial nonsultation exercise or in response to planning application P110056, you need to do it all over again for this one – P110303 – in order to make your views known.

If you have concerns on the impact on the spire, it would also be worth contacting Historic Scotland directly – I’m sure they will have something to say in response to seeing the plans anyway – but it’s good to let them know that you care about the fate of the Triple Kirks spire (Historic Building No. 19940).

As for the fate of the Peregrines, if you are worried about how this development may impact them it is certainly worth contacting Scottish Natural Heritage to express your concerns. The SMG website shows that they have apparently been funding some RSPB projects in Scotland, so could this mean that the RSPB may be reluctant to stand up for the Triple Kirks falcons? If you are an RSPB member perhaps you might consider dropping them an e-mail to ask them to fight for the falcons.

Anyway, whatever you feel like doing, please do it … the clock is ticking on Triple Kirks! So as the saying goes, act now or forever hold your peace.

As a footnote, it was nice to see the Rosemount Review report that :

‘ Rosemount Community Council rejected new plans to develop the derelict Triple Kirks site last night. The community council concluded that the new designs were “not in keeping with the area”. ‘

Oct 152010
 

By Sisterraysaid.

Academic institutions have always relied on benefactors and capitalist vested interests to fill their coffers and bestow them with status in the eyes of the great unwashed. The old universities have centuries of experience in the dark arts of spin, clandestine arrangements and the smoothing of waters through the old boys network.

The new universities scrabble around the table for leftovers or invent novel degrees in a variety of vocational pursuits in order to make ends meet. When carrots are dangled it is hard for them not to bite.

In the case of the honorary degree for Donald Trump at the Robert Gordon University the morsel was not only tasty but it brought together a meeting of egos in the form of Sir Ian Wood and the aforementioned Trump.

Two self-styled entrepreneurial philanthropic throwbacks to an era of unregulated free market capitalism have come together to comfort each other as they attempt to drive through their respective egotistical visions.

The ignorant populace of the north east just can’t see the benevolence in their actions and insist on raising questions regarding the morality of over ruling the democratically expressed views of the public and moving to evict citizens from their homes.

Sir Ian, as the Chancellor of the Robert Gordon University, has decided to honour Trump in a blatant political act of offering two fingers to those questioning whether their respective Union Square and Menie Golf Course projects have any grounding in ethical business practice.

The University’s own Academic Regulations have anticipated the potential for awards being awarded to unsuitable persons through reference to Honorary degrees being conferred on people ‘that represent good role models for the University’s students.’

Academic Regulations [Honorary Awards].

1.1 The following Honorary Doctorate Degrees may be conferred on persons who have achieved distinction in education, industry, business, culture, creative work or public service. Other considerations may include the fact that their achievements have a particular relevance to the University’s Mission, and that they represent good role models for the University’s students.

There has it appears been little interrogation of the personal qualities of Mr Trump and how they can be construed in terms of a suitable role model for students.

In an ironic twist the university has been pursuing staff to clarify as to whether they may have any conflicts of interest in relation to their role in the university, one of the criteria being involvement in activities that could bring the university into disrepute. Staff obviously don’t have to try on this score as the Governors are doing a grand job on their own