Zoe Corsi Archives - Aberdeen Voice

The Great City Gardens Project Gravy Train

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

Feb 282012

A person might think that a chamber of commerce exists to promote local businesses. Here in Aberdeen this is true as well. But as Aberdeen Voice’s Suzanne Kelly learns – the taxpayer is funding at least some of the PR work for the City Gardens Project – and the Chamber of Commerce and ACSEF seem to be leading the City Council by the nose.

The proposed City Gardens Project/Granite Web is a contentious idea which would see a mix of public and private interests building huge, granite ramps over Union Terrace Gardens.
While this idea may not even get off the ground, it has been a gold mine for some fortunate businesses via the Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce – at the taxpayer’s expense.

This article will primarily deal with money that the City Council was invoiced by the Chamber of Commerce for PR-related work. Before doing so, a little recap of other financial facts will add perspective.

PriceWaterhouse Coopers have come up with some grandiose projections including the creation of some 6,500 permanent jobs and £122 million flowing into Aberdeen every year until c. 2023: all because of the granite web. PriceWaterhouse Coopers were first paid £41,000 and change for TIF-related work in March 2010. Other invoices followed, and so far I have been shown by Scottish Enterprise £71,000 worth of PwC invoices.

These invoices are made out to Scottish Enterprise, and Scottish Enterprise is funded by the taxpayer. Unfortunately, these projections have been seized upon by the press and turned into ‘facts’ (The Press & Journal published these and other items in a box entitled ‘facts and figures’ on 19 January next to an article about the PwC projections and the garden’s many projected benefits).

The unelected and free-spending and secretive ‘Vote for the City Gardens Project Group’ have likewise promoted these figures in their literature as being reliable facts as well. They are projections, and arguably very optimistic ones at that. Whether or not these glowing projections (that we will have more permanent jobs from our web than London expects from its 2012 Olympics) are based on the fact that PwC is being paid by the side that wants to build the web is something the referendum voters may wish to ponder.

A Freedom of Information request I lodged with Scottish Enterprise some time ago revealed (details of which I have previously published) included:-

Item	Description	Date	Amount
1	Technical Feasibility Study to undertake an engineering, cost and design appraisal of the development options for UTG, each incorporating an arts centre.	Jun 2009	£162k
2	Architect, Design & Project management fees for a Contemporary Arts Centre project	Feb 09/May 10	£226k
3	Consultation Report – City Square Project..	Mar 2010	£113,915
4	Union Terrace Gardens (TIF)-Tax Increment Financing	Mar 10 Oct 10 Nov 10	£71,959.65
5	Scottish Enterprise holds 22 copies of invoices relating to ACSEF approved spend for activities relating to stakeholder engagement, events management, and communcations. [sic]	2009-10 2010-11	£51,766.60 £22,712.72

(source – Scottish Enterprise email exchange with Suzanne Kelly May 2011)

While this £648,000 was being spent, Aberdeen City Council was battling with potential job and service cuts in order to balance its books. It seems that these costs have largely been paid by the taxpayer via Scottish Enterprise and other vehicles, and I can find nothing to show that the Wood Family Trust, which has offered £50,000,000 to further the project, has paid towards any of these costs. The PR and promotional invoices referred to at Item 5 have been paid by the Aberdeen City taxpayer.

Before moving on to Item 5, which is the subject of this article, some of these other items are worth a further glance.

At Item 2 you will notice we are now talking about some kind of ‘Contemporary Arts Centre project’ – is Peacock already being edged out of the picture at this point?

Item 4 would seem to correspond to PriceWaterhouse Coopers invoices which I referred to. How much more money has been spent on PWC since this May 2011 exchange is unknown.

From what I have been subsequently sent by Scottish Enterprise, the bulk of the invoices at Item 5 were from the Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce to the City Council. In the words of Scottish Enterprise:-

9 invoices relate to financial year 2009/10 – these total £51,766.60

16 invoices relate to financial year 2010/11 – these total £36,692.95. This total is higher than the original figure stated due to the invoices received after the date of that response
There has been no spend on the City Garden Project from the ACSEF budget during the current financial year (SK notes – it is only February – there is time)

(source – Scottish Enterprise email to Suzanne Kelly February 2012)

Arguably a mere £88,459 is small change as Aberdeen City contemplates borrowing £92,000,000 (minimum) if the project goes ahead. However, this is money which the City paid from its own budgets – it is taxpayer money. Should a financially-pressured city use pubic money for propaganda purposes – PR, events and photos designed to promote the City Garden Project? Is the Wood Family Trust contributing any money towards these expenses yet? I simply do not know.

A spreadsheet of the expenses comprising Item 5 can be found online at http://oldsusannahsjournal.yolasite.com/ I would recommend looking at these 50 or so items.

If you look at the wording in the table above, ACSEF is apparently approving this expenditure. ACSEF is a public-private quango, and at the time of writing, Stewart Milne is on its board. He owns the Triple Kirks land adjacent to Union Terrace Gardens, and he wants to turn this landmark into an office complex which will likely enrich him if it goes ahead in my opinion.

Despite several emails, no one in a position of power has the slightest qualm with Mr Milne potentially having a conflict of interest. Why precisely ACSEF is allowed to commission and recommend for payment invoices to the City Council is a matter I personally find worrying.

Virtually none of the invoices from the Chamber to the City specify who / what company actually performed the services in question. What company got all the PR work? Who took the photos? I do note that Zoe Corsi of the BIG Partnership is on the Chamber’s Board of Directors – as are other key players such as Tom Smith, one of the two directors of the private entity, Aberdeen City Gardens Trust. This company seems to be in the thick of the decision-making processes; it is apparently the company which is holding onto the results of the design finalist public vote – which it refuses to release at present.

The taxpayer apparently paid for that exhibition and the public vote – and yet a private company seems to be withholding the results. The argument has been put forth that it is no longer relevant. Many people took the opportunity to write on the voting papers that they were against all the schemes and wanted the gardens retained and improved.

The public should have had this ‘no’ option at the final selection vote, but it seems councillors who asked for a ‘no’ option were outmoded by the Project Management Board (note – see the website listed previously for details of how all these companies and entities have interesting personnel overlaps).

It may be of interest to accountants that the party which actually performed the work not specified on these invoices, and with only a rare exception is VAT ever charged. It would be interesting to know whether or not the Chamber of Commerce adds any fees or commission charges to the work it is invoicing the City for.

Highlights of the list of invoices include:-

£180 paid for a photograph showing ‘inaccessibility of Union Terrace Gardens’
over £25,000 paid for ‘Stakeholder engagement’ events and so on since October 2009 to August 2010
£3500 paid to ‘Comedia’ for Charles Landry to attend event / speak
Redacted line items and handwritten notes adorn several of the invoices
One invoice – No. 42407 shows only one line relating to ‘coach hire’ – this is £246. However, the total shown on this one page invoice is for £7444 – what has happened?
A January 2010 Advertising bill from Aberdeen Press & Journals for £ 2,820 ( See: http://fraserdenholm.blogspot)
£11,000 in February 2010 charged from the Chamber to the City for “Development of images, movie, powerpoint and exhibition material for City Square Project as per attached sheets”

As to the redacted text on the invoices, redacted text has started showing up in Project Monitoring Board minutes and reports again, despite Councillor McCaig’s previous intervention to cease this practice. One company which has had its name redacted from recent documentation is Brodies.

The value of three Brodies invoices which I received copies of is around £12,000. One of these invoices from April 2011 is for:

“City Gardens Project – Development Constraints Report (Legal [sic] To fee for professional services in connection with the preparation of a development constraints report relating to the title of Union Terrace Gardens, Aberdeen, and surrounding land.”

I suppose our City’s in-house legal department cannot be expected to know whether or not it has free title to Union Terrace Gardens. Happily, experts have demonstrated the land is Common Good Land. As such, whether any of these garden projects can or should be legitimately carried out will be a big question in the future.

Earlier we saw how ACSEF was allowed to recommend these expenditures; we have seen how the Chamber of Commerce invoices the City for ACSEF-approved costs. If we were to put in some of the over-lapping names from ACSEF and the Chamber of Commerce into the equation, we would be able to see that:

ACSEF [including Stewart Milne, Jennifer Craw (of Wood Family Trust), Tom Smith (Director, Aberdeen City Gardens Trust), Colin Crosby (Director, Aberdeen City Gardens Trust), Callum McCaig (ACC) ]

approved invoices generated by the Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce [Colin Crosby; Zoe Corsi (BIG Partnership) , former director Tom Smith]

for the City Council [Callum McCaig]

to approve to further the aims of the Garden Project (CGP entity members include John Michie, Colin Crosby, Jennifer Craw).

Given the above, I suggest that the time is right for an entire re-think of how this project has been allowed to develop, and a full investigation into the demise of the Peacock plan and an investigation into the genesis of the current state of affairs might not be a bad idea as well.

While this is going on, a local care home has announced it will no longer provide 24/7 on-site staff as there is not enough money. Residents were told to drink less fluids at night time.

OS No. 55 – At A Loss For Worlds

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

Oct 212011

Old Susannah looks back over a week in Aberdeen which felt like a month whizzing by in a day and wonders how much of it was real, and how much more connectivity she can make sense of.

The past week in the Granite City was as vibrant and dynamic as you could have hoped for. There were walks and photos on Tullos Hill, and photos taken on Belmont Street, to the outrage of security guards.

The opening of the exhibition at the Pier (that’s one of the empty shops at the Academy shopping centre in case you didn’t know) for the six design finalists was of course the pinnacle of everyone’s week if not existence.

On the VIP ONLY opening day, an entire 5 people showed up before 9am to marvel at the designs.

These were our very own Lord Provost, Jennifer Craw, Aileen ‘Ho’Malone, Kate Dean, and a charming blonde woman with clipboard, supposed by many to be Zoe Corsi from the BIG Partnership.

It was as if all my Halloweens had come at once.

She saw me about to take a photo (yes, I fully admit I was going to take a picture, it is a fair cop) and came out of the building to tell me photos weren’t allowed. Laughingly I told her that I was on a public street. To teach me a good lesson I shan’t soon forget, she said ‘OK then’ and obligingly struck a pose. I feel obliged to reproduce it here, along with the picture that Security initially banned.

Look away now if you are of a sensitive disposition. It all becomes clear why they were so keen to stop me.

There are six finalists. The competition was very, very stiff (so stiff I suspect rigor mortis had set in), and there were many good submissions.

But there can be only six. Choosing these finalists was very difficult, and a bit of an agonising process as well, I don’t mind admitting. And I put my hand up – there is no way I could do a better job than any of these finalists; and probably could not have done as well as they did either.

All are to be congratulated for getting this far, and I mean that sincerely.

Without further ado here are the six finalists – for the best reviews of the preposterous, ridiculous, unworkable, ugly, childish, regressive, anti-elegant pieces of tripe which were shortlisted to destroy Union Terrace Gardens.

1. The Monolith

A beautiful and concise summary of the design which looks like a game of Jenga played badly at 3am. Nothing to do with Aberdeen. Even less to do with the garden. Everything to do with’ 2001: A Space Odyssey’. In the words of those on Facebook (which all the young people use for ‘connectivity’ and so on), the Monolith design is something ‘we can worship at the foot of’.

The supporters of Monolith are 30 strong, at the time of writing, the Official City Garden Project Exhibition Facebook site has 68 members. Yes, that’s right: the ‘silent majority’ who want the gardens built on have come out in full force. Please do visit the Monolith Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/VOTEMONOLITH?sk=wall for a full set of photos, and some colourful prose.

2. The Alternative City Gardens Design Contest

The artwork here is superior to anything you will see in the Pier. The people who created this page understand design principles, scale, colour and aesthetics to a degree our shortlisted official designers can only dream of. There are pterodactyls, sunken Statue of Liberties, giant slides, flying saucers and other elements worthy of your attention. The designs I see on this page are as affordable, attainable and desirable as anything you will find in the Pier. Please register your approval at:

https://www.facebook.com/VOTEMONOLITH?sk=wall#!/pages/Alternative-City-Gardens-Design-Contest/251979328187602 At present this worthy effort has 40 people who like it. Do scroll all the way down, or you might miss the ‘Colossus of Woods’. Beautiful and stirring. And I do like stirring.

3. TeletubbyLand

I nearly spat out my Tubby ‘ustard and Tubby toast when I came across this entry, immediately shortlisted as one of the six finalists.

Yes, someone has gone back to the set of the Teletubbies and re-created all those walkways. I see no potential problems with concrete walkways ascending and descending some 50 feet or better above the gardens. No one will fall, jump, slip or be pushed; they will be great for bobsled practice in the winter, and police will be able to respond to any crime on the ground in seconds.

If we covered these great concrete slabs with something to stop anyone throwing empty beer cans at those below, then we’d have a giant cage. Result! A Facebook poster has revealed that Tinky Winky is the mysterious £5 million pound donor towards the garden project going ahead. To this particular vision of our future, just say ‘Po.’

I only hope there will be a chance in all of this for me to attend an event where the designer(s) of Teletubbyland have to explain to a room full of grown-ups just what they were thinking.

Oh, and as reminder, for the shortlisted designers, a prize is awarded of somewhere in the region of £135,000. £135,000 for a drawing of the set of a kids’ tv show or a monolith. I must go find a definition of either ‘value for money’ or ‘old rope.’ Dipsy would be proud.

4. The Giant Glass Worm on ‘The Future Is Here’

We aren’t supposed to reveal who any of these creative masterminds are, but when you visit this website – which is a must – you will soon realise that No. 4 and No. 5 of my shortlist are both by this design giant. His observation of the glass structure proposed somehow to cover pedestrians, cars and trains may be one of the worthiest submissions yet:

“The worm doesn’t actually devour the humans, It appears to simply wine and dine them. Like a giant larval bad date” – Fraser Denholm

Obviously there won’t be any issues with air quality, safety, cleanliness (or just plain stupidity) if we make a giant glass worm cover people, trains and cars. Will smell lovely inside I’m certain. Birds will persuaded not to deface the beautiful worm by either defecating on it or crashing into it. Likewise vandals would never be tempted to do anything to a giant glass structure covering a road or train track. Why didn’t we think of this sooner?

Hats off to you Mr Denholm. A job at Foster & Partner surely awaits.

The best part of the serious submission is some giant banners in the worm’s body which for no particular reason read ‘science’ on them. These will soon be for sale as tea towels in every city centre souvenir shop which this project will deliver.
http://fraserdenholm.blogspot.com/2011/10/future-is-here.html

5. ‘I can’t believe it’s not Halliday Fraser Munro!’ (the underground bunker with no ventilation and with trees without roots growing on top of it).

Mr Denholm delivers some spectacular laughs, but we do have only six places on the shortlist. His prose is brief on this lovely design, but is incisive.

This design gives us all the underground lifestyle we can only dream of – no sun, no natural light, and not even any air vents of note, for if they were included, they would be very large and visible in the garden. The garden features giant trees which very thoughtfully don’t need to have any roots. Most plants have underground parts that are at least as large as their ‘aerial’ parts. Not these ones.

Four-hundred-year-old trees are so yesterday.

Get rid of those, the things living in them, and get some of these magic, rootless trees. Denholm also correctly identifies the rice paddies (they can’t be anything but) which grace another shortlisted design.

With all this connectivity business, I’m starting to wonder whether all these people pushing the project forward are in some way ‘connected.’ Maybe even well connected.

6. The Garden of Earthly Delights (H Bosch)

Normally in an important competition, it would be wrong to include yourself, friends or family members, but this is my late-breaking entry for the competition. It’s not as if there are any family ties between the official competition companies, entities, sponsors, backers and so on.

Feel free to vote for my design, which is also on the Alternative Garden Project site.

I think it nicely captures the place where the garden scheme movers and shakers are heading. And it’s got a space for musical performances, and access at all sides.

When you do visit the Pier, pay attention to all the lovely drawings. See the trees that cannot exist if something is built under them. See the lovely people walking around casually, just like you’ll be doing in February.

See the complete absence of logic. If Star Trek’s Mr Spock were real and went to this show, he’d have a breakdown. Comfort yourself with the fact there are several good pubs nearby. You will need one.

And there you have it. I have sadly taken up so much space with the finalists that there is only room for one definition. For some reason this sprang to mind.

Boycott

(noun, verb – modern English) to embargo, ban or cease trade or activities with a person, company or entity.

Folks – has someone or some company taken advantage of your good nature for too long? Is, say, a football mogul asking you to ultimately pay (via an ‘uplift’ in retail tax) to turn your Victorian garden into Teletubby land? Has such a person sent letters to the press ‘warning’ that unless we build a monolith or worm, the city is going to fail? Has a certain chemist likewise said that a concrete spider web will save us and we must all stick to it? Has a certain councillor said that you need to support a monolith and monorail? Has a hotelier called you a luddite NIMBY for not wanting a big bunker in er, your backyard?

Whatever can you do about it?

Well, if you wanted, you could boycott these and other like-minded businesses and business people. Don’t shop with them. Don’t use their premises. Don’t for the love of Pete vote for them. Don’t spend your hard-earned money to watch their football team lose, and don’t (for many reasons) buy a house from them.

If everyone were to boycott people who used their power in ways the public did not wish, then things would change. And not into a giant worm either.

Next week: who knows?

Reminders:
1. Please keep your artwork coming for the Union Terrace Gardens art contest, which (because of lots of stuff) has not closed yet. Alternative designs for the garden project most welcome.
2. Anti-deer cull postcards still available – get in touch if you need some; I know where they can be found.