"What me, worried?"* A bit, yes, if I'm honest.
I am worried about my city. And I am worried about my country because of what has happened in my city. Sometimes I think we in the Scotland get complacent because we expect democracy to work. And when it is being undermined we tend not to notice or we shrug and think it must be some kind of mistake. But as with most things the clues are in the little things.
In the last few years I have been watching as one of our city centre parks is being wrangled over. One camp wants to develop it, the other wants it to be left alone. I am in the latter camp. I think that a Victorian park with mature trees should at most need some cleaning up, some more lighting put in and the toilets restored and re-opened to revitalise a park that used to be able to host events before the council decided to neglect it. Others believe that the whole structure of the park should be changed at a cost over potentially over £100million. Each side is entitled to their view. That’s democracy.
Next month we get to vote on whether the proposed design for the park goes ahead. A referendum is being held. Yes or No. Simple as that. The problem is that the last time a consultation with the public was held on this issue, of those that voted 55% said no. But this result was then ignored and the plans kept going anyway. Hmmm, that’s not democracy.
So some designs were put forward and the public were asked which ones they preferred. That’s democracy.
But there was no option on the voting form that said something along the lines of “I don’t want any of these developments, I wan the park to remain as it is”. So as soon as you voted for any of the designs it meant you were putting your support to developing the park. Even if you went for any of the designs that you deemed “the least worst option”. Hmmm, that’s not really democracy.
Turns out the design most people wanted wasn't even chosen anyway. This one was.
It gets even more interesting as of last week. One of the companies whose design was chosen as the winner of the design competition, Buro Happold, announce on their website their joy at being awarded the contract for the redevelopment of Union Terrace Gardens. Oh, hang on a minute. What about that referendum in March? Surely no-one will be awarded any contract until the voters have decided in that fair and transparent referendum? Hmmm, I’m getting a bad feeling about this so called democracy.
Someone from Aberdeen City Council gets a call after someone on twitter points this out. And Buro Happold promptly takes the announcement down and someone probably gets a bollocking for letting the cat out of the bag. I’m still waiting on Chief Executive Valerie Watts reply to my email on why this happened. However the radio media are on it like wasps on a donut. Now a free press- that’s democracy!
The Aberdeen Journals, Press and Journal and Evening Express instead carry no mention of the gaffe at all in the next day’s editions deciding instead to focus solely on former Aberdeen resident of thirty years ago, football manager Alex Ferguson, who has on that day lent his support to the Yes Campaign. Free and fair press? Hmmm, you decide if that’s democracy, folks.
My last little paragraph concerns today’s little exercise in democracy or the lack of, and that is freedom of speech. Something I really happen to like. Fellow blogger, Fraser Denholm, who is far more eloquent on matters concerning the Union Terrace question than I, wakes up to discover his blog has been flagged as spam and that Google have temporarily taken in down whilst they investigate. As they must. This happens on the day that ACSEF, the body responsible for economic development in the City and Shire and huge campaigners for the Yes vote go on “a massive myth busting drive”. Their words. Stopping everyone having a chance to have their say on a subject? Democracy? Hmmm.
***
*Update 2 09/02/12: Stars of the film One Day Removals Patrick Wight and Scott Ironside will be making a short film in support of the Save Union Terrace Gardens campaign in the gardens on 10th of February from 1pm. All welcome.
*Alfred E Neuman appears courtesy of Mad Magazine.
Don't ever miss a Misssive, subscribe!
14 comments:
You left out the bit about ignoring the design that people chose - that's not democracy either!
I've been wondering if it's possible that we could have a referendum resulting in a "no" vote and the council ignoring it and pressing ahead anyway. I'm afraid the Bupo Happold website incident merely compounds this fear. The only credible outcome of this referendum will be a "no" vote. Otherwise, we'll forever wonder if the referendum result was fixed somehow.
My hope is that the council are half-minded to dump the project, and are hoping the referendum will give them the excuse to pull out without their tails between their legs. I'm just not sure, though.
One thing is for sure though, comparing the picture of the current gardens to the new design just shows how mad this idea is. I think other cities would be clamouring to get such a nice looking garden in the middle of their city. I can't believe we might end up with a concrete maze of underpasses where our nice garden currently sits.
Thanks Doug- i have put in a line to reflect of course your point that i omitted! CXheers!
just to let you know that the V&A design that was the "people's favourite" was also not chosen, and with (as far as I know) consultation & awareness, the reasons were given as to why a different design was chosen. The difference here is, I don't think we've been told... other than "the winner was cheaper"... (which, if you look at the construction of the granite web Vs foster's glass worm, I'm sure Fosters would have been "cheaper".. perhaps they were just too realistic in their costing.
The way I see it, if the Foster design wasn't feasible on a cost-basis, then just the act of offering it as a choice was deeply dishonest - you don't let people vote on something and THEN tell them it's not a viable option after all.
Of course they always said the judging panel would have the deciding vote, so effectively the whole thing was merely a cynical exercise in duping people into having an interest in something which they had largely decided they didn't want.
If you deny people their choice, you shouldn't pretend you're offering them a choice in the first place. "We'll go with your choice if it's what we want" is not a choice.
http://www.spanglefish.com/justimagine/index.asp
See my Just Imagine site.. Spoof/fun/satirical site with MAD ideas for new CSP ..
The drop-box voting at the public exhibition was indeed a farce and a sham. As the blog says, there was no 'none of the above' option but it was easy enough to write that on the sheet, as I did (for what it was no doubt worth). To my knowledge, the results were never made public (and there was never any promise to do so), so how does 'anon' above know that the V&A design was 'favourite'? And what is this "reasons given" communication he or she talks of? Anyway, the results of this should be taken with a pinch of salt. Lord Foster himself could have mobilised an army of the willing to drop in votes for his design, if he'd so chosen. Also, there was no info on cost (among other critical factors) so how were we supposed to make an informed decision?
The Buro Happold thing is a massive clanger by them. there's now a correction on their website, but it is indeed worrying that in the original release they were talking about "third round interviews" - who (on either the council or the contractor side) would want to go through all that when the project might never happen?
In fairness and democracy I would just like to point out that there is indeed a support for the development of Union Terrace Gardens. The area in question has become a forgotten space up until redevelopment was mentioned and now all of a sudden there is a group supporting a campaign for no development. The proposed new development will still include the green space that so lacks in other city centres. Only now it will be better integrated with the main thoroughfare of Aberdeen. I also believe that the development can be the catalyst for developing Union Street and making it a more attractive place for businesses to grow and develop. The whole city center needs a boost and I believe that the development of Union Terrace Gardens to be that boost.
http://www.urbanrealm.com/news/3299/Analysis:_Union_Terrace_Gardens.html
Democracy? In the Magic Circle I believe such a technique is known as Magician's Choices.
In the real world they're known as Hobson's.
And you're right: it ain't democracy.
Civic vandalism - that's what it is. It is happening everywhere. Anyone familiar with Helensburgh will know that Coquhoun Square, a Victorian Square that small town Scotland would give its eye teeth for, is about to be butchered.
All that money? fill the potholes with fecking banknotes!
Anonymous (17:07) - the crucial word in your comment is "believe". We have been provided with no evidence that this scheme will cause an influx of shops to open around Union Street, we're just being asked to blindly believe what we're told.
How will the gardens being "better integrated" with Union Street make shops open up on Union Street? There is a very simple reason why Union Street is looking run down - Union Square.
How do we revitalise Union Street? Well, for a start we need to recognise that "the High Street" as we know it is dying all around the UK. We also need to recognise that people will shop where they can park - and that means Union Square. Most of all, we need to recognise that Aberdeen is not Glasgow - there is a limit to how many retail outlets a city of only about 250,000 people can sustain. We have Union Square, Bon Accord Centre, St Nicks, Trinity Centre, various retail parks like Kittybrewster and the beach - maybe we just can't spend enough money to sustain a full high street as well?
Three things that might help Union Street: cheaper buses, free parking and lower rental rates. Decimating Union Terrace Gardens will not change a thing, except making some old rich geezer feel satisfied with himself that he's "made his mark" on his home town.
Anonymous is right - there was indeed support for development in the gardens. There was also funding and planning permission for an arts centre built into the gardens slopes. Sadly, someone decided that instead of adding facilities to the gardens, and bringing them back to life with funding mainly from outside of the area, it would be better to take out a huge loan to create a building instead, while claiming it would do just the same (At 10x the cost).
Oh yes, and the design with funds, planning and support - that would have opened in summer 2011.
I'm tempted to tell you to bide your time :) When Perth & Kinross Council (who lack even a dot-to-dot approach to planning never mind joined up) consulted us on the fate of our empty and abandoned City Hall they presented us with several options, ignoring the obvious - knock the damn thing down. Five years and a big maintenance bill later they've finally opted for the option that was not on an option and have decided to knock it down. Mind you I'm not holding my breathe, I expect those in favour of re-development are at this very moment biding their time.....
Rosa Redd
http://www.spanglefish.com/justimagine/index.asp
I have posted your blog onto my Just Imagine site.. See Links..!
Post a Comment