| _ \ _) | _ \ \ \ / -_) __/ _` | | \ ____| \___/ \_/ \___| _| \__,_| _| _| _| __ __| | \ \ / | | | \ -_) \ \ \ / \ _ \ | -_) _| _| _| \___| \_/\_/ _| _| \___/ _| \___| __| __ __| | _) ( _| _` | _ / | | | \ | \ _` | \___| _| \__,_| ___| \_, | _| _| _| _| _| _| \__, | ___/ ____/ Jazz

Feb 22

It feels wrong

I’ve managed to keep UTG off this blog so far so I reckon it’s about time I put my tuppence in. [edit: after reading the post I realise this is more than tuppence worth, go grab a coffee and come back...] First a quick timeline from my memory banks, this may not be entirely chronologically accurate…

When the original CSP ‘vision’ was first tabled I thought it looked pants. It was ugly. I’d never been in Union Terrace Gardens at that point so didn’t really worry either way about it. The thought of a £50m cash injection to a city, which at the time was on it’s knees financially, sounded good though. Then I found out about the PVA scandal. This raised questions in my mind about the legitimacy of the CSP project. It felt like buying or bullying by a big dog on an underdog. It felt wrong.

There was an unofficial ‘vote’ organised by ACSEF – non binding but a good indicator of what people who were interested wanted. This was an opportunity to voice concerns about the ‘vision’ as it stood and ACSEF seemed to listen to some of the points. The CSP was re-branded CGP to encompass the strong feeling displayed about the loss of green space etc. They didn’t listen to the main point that 55% just didn’t want it at all. This to me felt like another failure of democracy. It felt wrong.

Regardless, ACSEF pushed ahead, citing a “silent majority” as the reason for the loss in the vote and put out an “International design competition” to come up with a redesign of the unpopular CSP for the CGP. This had to be “international” because the entire project attracted scathing critiscism by the Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland, who branded it silly and actually backed the PVA plans, calling them ‘visionary’. Nevertheless, the design competition went ahead, which felt wrong.

A shortlist was compiled and taken to another public vote. The public were asked to vote by ordering the six chosen designs in order of preference. This was exhibited for a couple of weeks. The votes were counted and the winner was chosen winner and another design favoured by ACSEF went through to a judging panel (made up of ACSEF members/business people). This felt wrong.

The second design, affectionately dubbed the concrete mankini, more officially known as the Granite Web was chosen. Well of course it was, that’s why it was taken to the panel. All this time ACC had been receiving criticism over it’s handling of the whole thing and looked unsteady with it’s decision. It decided to hold a city-wide referendum on this. This will save the blushes of the councillors who backed it, the Liberal Democrats(I use the term to refer to the party to which they belong, NOT liberal democracy as a concept, they are re-branded tories in Aberdeen) in particular seem keen to get an “out” from this. All parties say they shall respect the outcome of the (non-binding) referendum however. This doesn’t mean that if the referendum comes back saying YES to the CGP that it’ll actually go ahead though! (I know, I’m not making this up, seriously) it’ll just be subject to reviews on planning, finance etc. Not only that but if the vote comes back as YES to retaining UTG the campaign say, inaccurately, that that’ll be the end of any investment in UTG excepting normal maintenance costs. There’s no plan B. This feel like bullying. It feels wrong.

So that’s where we are at the moment. The referendum is taking place but it’s gone even more downhill in the last few days. For a start the referendum literature was put out with erroneous information, see this ACC retraction. Oh, previous to the packs even going out a building company stuck on a self-congratulatory message about winning the contract to build it! That really felt wrong. (They did retract it later, as I pointed out in the tweet, blaming an oversight and ambiguity in the article language.) Now as much as the referendum seems democratic, and it is, it is flawed. People will vote who have no interest in the project. This is ACSEF’s so called silent majority. The problem is that the very point of their silence shows they are happy with either outcome. Being forced into voting one way or the other removes this. If anything there should have been an option of “don’t really care”. People feel obliged to vote though, so will. There is no such thing as a silent majority around an issue. It is only those with an interest who should be counted. This feels like ACSEF pushing people into it, but how do you argue against a system in which you believe? This feels like bullying, which of course, as I’m sure you’re getting by this post, feels wrong.

ACSEF and the CGP campaign are campaigning hard. The adverts are at best being conservative with the truth, at worst telling outright lies. Their sponsorship is not being (dis)played(depending on the medium). For example, every ad I’ve heard so far says this won’t cost us a penny. It doesn’t say what the source of the funding is then. The government may release what’s called TIF funding for it, should they ever receive a business case for it. ACC have not supplied such a case. So it’d be paid for, in part, initially by a government grant. Well, perhaps I missed something here but the government doesn’t actually have any money, it’s our money held by them to distribute to causes. It COSTS US MONEY!!! This feels wrong. Ah, but this will be repaid by the TIF scheme, which essentially means (though nobody’s bothered about the details of exactly how the bureaucracy will implement it) that businesses deemed(by whom?) to have benefited directly from the CGP will pay a different rate of tax (TIF stands for tax incremental funding, by the way) than other businesses in the area. Well, doesn’t this harm the, as yet nonexistant, business case for this. Businesses, as was pointed out at a BBC arranged meeting earlier this month – read about it at this awesome blog post by lenathehyena, go where the financial gain is, not where looks pretty (or in this case pretty ugly). A tax penalty will not attract new business to the area, which means less new business to pay the TIF payback etc. The council will still need to find the money and it’s my feeling that they’ll decide that *all* businesses will have benefited from the build so tax existing businesses across Aberdeen to meet it. After all, current estimates are that this’ll cost £140-odd million, I believe £92million of which would be TIF. That’s a LOT of tax to grab by anyone’s standards. The whole thing feels ill-thought out and makes me feel uneasy. It feels wrong.

Incidentally if and when the CGP goes ahead and the TIF is in effect I shall be publishing a list of companies affected by the TIF, in my opinion supporters of the CGP, on a site. ACC has already said they’d make that information available on their website to save me a monthly FOI request. This is to allow you to decide in a more transparent way if you wish to do business with these companies or not.

Then there’s the complaints of bullying, oh, not by UTG supporters, but by CGP leaders! Yes, leaders, the kind of people who get where they are by being bullied… It feels like a smear campaign, it feels wrong. I have not witnessed any bullying, although I hear (from pro CGPers mostly) that “both” sides have been active in bullying. I’ve seen a LOT of hot debate but never anything remotely bullying. There are lots of strong views on the subject, lots of heated arguments over it but it’s always been on-topic. I’m not saying it didn’t happen and I absolutely do not condone the abhorrent behaviour that *is* bullying when it happens, I’m just saying I’ve not seen it.

On a personal note, I already voted. I voted to retain UTG for the following reasons.

  • I have children. They should be allowed to enjoy UTG as a historically relevant, open and safe space. (yes it *is* safe, check out the figures.) Citing the place as unsafe with those figures feels wrong.
  • The argument against those figures is that there’s no crime because nobody uses UTG because it’s full of criminals. Umm, I don’t know where to start on that one! This brings me on to my problem with the argument that nobody uses it. And? If it were a business and nobody was going through the gates that’d be an issue. When it’s a park, not so much. I’ve used it. I enjoy a short stroll around it. In better weather I enjoy hanging out there. It’s quietness is to it’s credit, especially in such a central location. It’s not a business, it’s a park, loads of people there every day would ruin the peace. During events I’ve seen it very busy by the way. The whole argument about user numbers is self-defeating and feels wrong.
  • I don’t appreciate bullying by those in seemingly powerful positions. It feels wrong.
  • I don’t appreciate those with the financial means, using money as leverage. It feels like selling out, which feels wrong.
  • I don’t appreciate the loss of the park as a park. Why must it make money? It’s a park. The CGP campaign has a financial benefit as fundamental to the whole project. It feels greedy, it feels wrong.
  • I value democracy. I value this above almost all other things. The only word I can think of to describe democracy in Aberdeen, especially around this, is invisible. It feels so wrong that there was simply no other way I could vote!
  • There is no benefit to the city with the destruction of UTG. If this was going on the old St Nic’s House site the whole city would be behind it. It’d be replacing one eyesore with a lesser eyesore. What’s being tabled though is the destruction of one area of beauty with an eyesore(IMHO – I know some people like the mankini design). This feels wrong.

The CGP PR bulldozer is in full-effect, the UTG campaign has no funding to match it. We have to do what little we can and hope those undecided vote the right way, by voting to retain. I urge those not yet decided to vote for retaining UTG. If you are on twitter add your face here too and then tweet about your support, if you’re not on twitter go to the page and click the facebook like button to share it. If you despise social networks then please, most importantly vote to retain UTG. The alternative is just not worth it socially, financially, ethically, environmentally, aspirationally or by way of quality.

In closing, this feels wrong because it *is* wrong.

Permanent link to this article: http://blog.the-kid.org/it-feels-wrong/

Jan 19

Made in the North East

This would have been a twitter post but I realised there’s no way I could make it in 140 chars!

In the morning and in the car I generally listen to Original 106 on t’wireless. Recently they’ve been making a big deal of all their programming being made in the north east, using a voiceover where I always imagine the guy knocking on someone’s head as he says the words “in the north east”.

The main other local station, NorthSound, is one of the large syndication that covers Scotland, including Tay FM, Clyde1, West FM (noticing any similarities with those links yet?) etc. At night to save money they syndicate the same programs to all their stations. Original doesn’t belong to the syndication and runs it’s own programming strategy, late-night this essentially involves a program with no presenter. I actually like this show as it occasionally produces some gems from music (from my) past.

My problem, no that’s too strong a word, my question, is this. What’s so good about all the programs being made in the north east? Northsound’s only decent programs, in my opinion, are the syndicated ones. Gina and Romeo late at night are about all I listen to on the odd occasions I even bother to try NS1 again. It’s also hysterical hearing some of the neds who call in with their tales of woe, of course this is a personal taste thing. I think neds are funny, though cringeworthy. In any case those are NS’s best programs.

So it’s not about quality of programs.

How about carbon footprint then? Perhaps the carbon footprint of a locally produced show is less than one being broadcast and relayed from the central belt. I doubt this is true in any measurable or significant level, and in any case any increases in transmitter output is probably negated and then some by the fact that for every station that runs the syndication there’s a presenter who doesn’t need to get to work, meaning no emissions on travel.

So it’s not about environmental impact.

So how about money? Well no, here again the station loses out. Employing late-night DJs, though outstanding at their job, doesn’t save money. The guys on at night are brilliant, Claire regularly has me in stitches. They come at a cost though, financially speaking employees and specifically wages, are the biggest cost to most companies. This is why thru the night is just a ‘big CD’ with ads and pre-recorded news bulletins. Making it all in the north east costs more.

I understand the undertone of the point though. Northsound and the other networked stations don’t make it clear to the listener that it’s a syndicated program. The links have the presenter saying the name of the station on which the show is being broadcast, not a central name such as “You’re listening to late night Gina on the Scottish syndicated radio network” (or even just on Clyde1 – which I believe is the source, they use the Clyde1 phone number anyway). This is something that I feel, in the interest of transparency they should make clearer. There could well be listeners who don’t realise they’re listening to a syndication who can then decide if they wish to remain listeners or not. I don’t really understand the apparent “cover up”, what difference does it make?

I just don’t think saying “all made in the north east” is showing any particular benefit…

…I wasn’t made in the north east and I’m gallus.

Permanent link to this article: http://blog.the-kid.org/made-in-the-north-east/

Jan 08

I’m not gay

There I said it!

A lot of people don’t realise this. They assume for one reason or another that I *am* gay. It doesn’t matter to me what they think and I seldom correct them upon this assumption if they don’t come out (pardon the pun) and ask me. Recently I’ve been noticing a disturbing trend though. People are accusing me of being gay and then get annoyed when I don’t take it as an insult. I mean to say the accusers *mean* it as an insult. It’s no more insulting to me than being accused of waking in the morning or breathing.

Another disturbing trend I’ve noticed is people feeling it’s OK to pass comments about my son’s behaviour such as, “you’d better watch him, dressing like that” or even “what if he turned out gay?”

Well, what if? It’s none of my business and it’s certainly none of the accusers as I’m sure whatever his sexuality he’d have the good taste not to choose the questioner as a potential partner. There’s nothing wrong with being gay. There’s nothing wrong with being straight. There’s nothing wrong with sexuality in general. I’m certain that being gay is no more a life choice than being straight. I didn’t choose to be straight it just happened that way. I suppose that extends to all sexualities. You might be into s&m but don’t know it until you’ve tried it or been introduced to it somehow. That’s not to say you make the choice that it turns you on. The only choice you make is whether to participate in it. Well that’s true of us all isn’t it.

Here’s what I hope for my children. Safe happy lives. If their sexuality later in life leads them to that then they have my blessing. I love them for who they are, sexuality aside. It goes for most people, if you’re not hurting anyone and all involved are adults of sound mind then what’s the problem eh?

So think of me however you like but if we’re not having sex together, you have no business in my sexuality. Maybe I protest too much…

Permanent link to this article: http://blog.the-kid.org/im-not-gay/

Jan 08

Stuff in my head

Happy new year (are we still saying that?) I hope it’s great for you.

Every day I have ideas about things. This is part of being a human being I suppose. I often think I should write them down and used to just blog them. I was going to write down a list of these here but decided to redact a *lot* of words (about 1500). As it stands I’ve decided to limit this post to just the following two things in my head at the moment…

New years resolutions:- I kept mine last year for the whole of 2011, it was simply to “get up earlier”. However awful it feels of a morning, however late the night before I got up and got on with it. Within ten minutes of rising you feel better anyway, just about the same time the first gulp of caffeinated beverage of your choice hits the back of your throat. I managed to keep it because it was simple and didn’t aim too high too fast. This year I’m going to try something else, instead of a resolution per sé. This year I’m going to make a bucket list of things I want to achieve before the year is out. I’ll probably make that the next post, or perhaps give it a page of it’s own.

Projects:- I always have “projects” in mind. Yesterday I thought I’d try to recruit a bunch of tweeters/bloggers/writers to make a “Morning Express” site. Essentially it’d be any story from the EE or P&J but without the bias. I dismissed it as too high maintenance as I have enough on my plate at the time. It would be easy to set up with even a simple WP install, styled to resemble but not copy, the EE or P&J depending on the article. Each article would also link back to the biased original in a similar style as uncyclopediauncyclopedia - wikipedia linkage Another thing I need to get back up and running is the realaberdeen site. When it was good it was ace, the move to twitter killed it off really so I’d like to bring it back in it’s “original” blog style. The aberdeen cars site is good but it’s focused too much on sarcasm and car dependency, something realaberdeen is not against at all but just wishes people would use the cars on which they are dependant properly. Parking, leaving room for cyclists, realising the speed limit is just that, a limit not a target etc. realaberdeen loves cars and good drivers. Aberdeen cars is more interested in cyclists and mockery of car users, which is often richly deserved, on this the two sites agree!

Permanent link to this article: http://blog.the-kid.org/stuff-in-my-head/

Older posts «