Bosses threaten to quit federation

By Morag Lindsay

Published: 25/02/2010

Angry bosses have said they will quit the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) because they weren’t consulted before the organisation gave its public backing to Sir Ian Wood’s city square scheme in Aberdeen.

Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce also came in for criticism yesterday for its decision to issue a joint statement with the FSB, Oil and Gas UK and the CBI in support of the £140million plan.

Both organisations insisted they were acting in the best interests of members when they said the project, being driven by Aberdeen City and Shire Economic Future (Acsef), would be the “catalyst” for regenerating the region.

Brenda Craig, of Aberdeen Control Ltd, said she would be seeking a refund of the electrical engineering firm’s subscription to the FSB if it did not retract the statement and seek accurate feedback from members.

“The chamber has at least put something in writing to us, but we have had no correspondence from the FSB on the subject at all,” she said.

“It’s such an emotive subject they should have balloted people before putting out a statement for or against.”

Mrs Craig, company secretary of the business based in Union Glen, Aberdeen, added: “I am opposed to Sir Ian’s scheme because it will mean the destruction of Union Terrace Gardens and to my knowledge there are a lot of other members who feel the same way.”

Kenneth Flavill, who owns the Artists Pad in the city’s Castlegate, said he would not be renewing his membership of the federation.

“I wasn’t consulted before the statement was issued,” he said.

“For Andy Willox to state that ‘we are backing this project’ without contacting all members to gather opinions is slightly out of order.”

Last night, Mr Willox, policy convener for the Federation of Small Businesses in Scotland, admitted members had not been polled but insisted he spoke for the majority of firms in Aberdeen.

He said it would be regrettable if people quit the FSB over the issue, but he maintained it had been the right thing to do.

“I have been speaking a lot about this issue to people in the federation and as a member of the Acsef board and at times we have to take a stand on behalf of our business members in general.”

Chamber chief executive Bob Collier also defended the position of his organisation.

He said it had posted information to all its members on Tuesday, setting out the reasons why its policy council was supporting the city square scheme.

Mr Collier said he had taken “a handful” of calls from members who were concerned about the chamber’s stance and would be more than happy to discuss the matter with anyone who had concerns.

Reader's Comments

I see that the Support the City Square Project petition received a grand total of 9 new signatures yesterday bringing its total now to 1414 as opposed to 147 for the Save The New Contemporary Arts Centre petition which now has 7404. This is despite the fact the The Chamber of Commerce has e-mailed all its members urging them to sign, The Big Partnership has done the same to all its contacts, as have ACSEF chairman Sir Tom Smith to lots of companies, Stewarty Milne to all his employees and The Wood Group chief exec to his. One would have thought with all these influential folk urging their employees and business contacts on, the City Square Project would have been streets ahead of a wee petition back by a vocal minority of contemporary artists!
Alasdair Johnston
Report this comment

I see that the Support the City Square Project petition received a grand total of 9 new signatures yesterday bringing its total now to 1414 as opposed to 147 for the Save The New Contemporary Arts Centre petition which now has 7404. This is despite the fact the The Chamber of Commerce has e-mailed all its members urging them to sign, The Big Partnership has done the same to all its contacts, as have ACSEF chairman Sir Tom Smith to lots of companies, Stewarty Milne to all his employees and The Wood Group chief exec to his. One would have thought with all these influential folk urging their employees and business contacts on, the City Square Project would have been streets ahead of a wee petition back by a vocal minority of contemporary artists!
Alasdair Johnston
Report this comment

It's all becoming very silly, petitions for and against, the two projects. The total number of signatures represents only about 4.4% of the total 200,000 population of the city. Therefore 95% of the general population aren't bothered, and, THAT is what's wrong with Aberdeen. Nobody seems interested or cares, and, frankly neither of the two projects are worth pursuing anyway. There are better things that the money could be spent upon, that would bring job opportunites to the city.
Ian Stewart
Report this comment

Surely then the Press and Journal should not have printed a headline which stated that “5,000 firms unite behind Sir Ian’s vision” when this is clearly not the case. Any decent bit of journalism on the P&J’s behalf should have confirmed opinion contrary to the statements that the AGCC and FSB released. Can I remind the editor of Section 1 i) of the Editors Code on the Press Complaints Commission website which clearly states: The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information And The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.
Jonathan Mennie
Report this comment

Dead right, Jonathan! So whence came yesterday's P&J headline, later parroted in the Evening Express? What basis was there ever for the assertionthat "5,000 Firms Unite Behind Sir Ian's Vision"?
Alex Mitchell
Report this comment

See the website of Aberdeen Civic Society for informed, properly researched & in-depth analysis by Diane Morgan & Norman Marr of the rival proposals for Union Terrace Gardens.
Alex Mitchell
Report this comment

So Andy Willox "admitted members had not been polled". An Acsef board member is admitting that he orchstrated a story pupporting to show that 5,000 businesses support the City Square knowing it may not be true. Using his position on the FSB to promote the Acsef scheme. I have seen Colin Crosby speak, and he insisted that his position as a board member (of Acsef) meant that he could only be associated with the highest possible standards. I take it that Crosby will either now resign his position, those standards having been so horribly compromised by Willox, or he will seek Willox's resignation from Acsef. Or do Acsef live in some consequence-free world where they are allowed to indulge in falsehood and double standards? It would certainly appear so - unless Acsef take the opportunity to lance this boil at the earliest opportunity. I won't be holding my breath, though.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

For Chamer of Commerce members who feel that they are being misrepresented, or that the Chamber has brought itself into disrepute through association with such misleading headlines, you can make your feelings clear by emailing robert.collier@agcc.co.uk . Federation of Small Business members who have issues with being represented as supporting the City Square Project, can email Andy Willox, OBE, and Acsef board member, at andy@gold-star.co.uk Perhaps some enterprising journalist from a media owner with principles would also like to look into this story, given that Aberdeen Journals so demonstrably will not do so.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

Ian Stewart, the fact is Peacock and friends need a new home anyway (Peacock will be homeless next year) and the creative/cultural scene in Aberdeen needs a boost. This should be pushed through in combination with wider city improvements.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Alex Mitchell could you post a link, I found the Aberdeen Civic Society awful to navigate.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

The average crowd at an Aberdeen game is just short of 13,000 and falling... If the home crowd is, say 10,000, then, using Ian Stewarts' argument, 190,000 people in Aberdeen don't give a stuff about football. Pittodrie could be developed for housing, jobs created, the general air of anger and depression in the city lifted on a Saturday afternoon... Think of the savings to the P&J in all that saved newsprint.
Gordon Watt
Report this comment

— “There is however always a danger when one individual claims to speak for others." Sir Ian Wood 12/Feb/2010: http://bit.ly/bx1Aup
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Link to that quote: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1603307
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Ryan :- http://beehive.thisisnorthscotland.co.uk/Uploads/2311/ACSNewsletterNo69March2010sc.doc
Kenneth Flavill
Report this comment

The average crowd at an Aberdeen game is just short of 13,000 and falling... If the home crowd is, say 10,000, then, using Ian Stewarts' argument, 190,000 people in Aberdeen don't give a stuff about football. Pittodrie could be developed for housing, jobs created, the general air of anger and depression in the city lifted on a Saturday afternoon... Think of the savings to the P&J in all that saved newsprint.
Gordon Watt
Report this comment

Actually Gordon, I would agree, the majority of people in Aberdeen don't give a stuff about the Football team either. Or perhaps not, you always tend to see a large number of supporters buses heading south bearing the colours of Rangers or Celtic. If you've been following my comments on AFC, you have highlighted exactly what will happen, should Stuart Milne finally get his way and move AFC to the stadium at Loirston. I stand by my opinion, and, that is only what it is, MY opinion, that the majority of people in Aberdeen don't care, and, are largely apathetic to any changes, unless it DIRECTLY affects them. Will a civic square project affect the majority of people in Aberdeen in any way shape or form?
Ian Stewart
Report this comment

My opinion is that the degree of fury against the city square project is more widespread in the city than it's given credit for here. Not everyone has access to the internet or is aware of the various websites. It was interesting to note at the public meeting that only the millionaires and businessmen said anything in favour of the square, the overwhelming sentiment was strongly against the project. Now that's almost 300 citizens with friend, neighbours and work colleagues who are passionate about keeping Union Terrace Gardens. For us normally passive Aberdonians, conditioned by Calvinism to endure and accept, that is a major city controversy. I certainly know friends who haven't been directly involved in meetings and petitions who are jumping up and down with rage at the whole way the CSP has been handled. I reckon the whole controversy has gone viral in the city.
mike shepherd
Report this comment

Of the 95% of the population that is not bothered how much of them are actually Aberdonians i.e. Ukrainian, Latvian Polish, ECT? The fact that Petcocks plans have already been approved and passed (Funding in place) means that Aberdonians have already accepted the change for UTG.
Robert Horne
Report this comment

I wouldn't think it is because 95% of people are not bothered. It is more likey they just they don't want to get involved because we are bocoming more aware that we can not trust or believe those people in a position of trust, like politicians, councillors, company executives, Lords, OBE holders Football clud directors, and the likes.This whole fiasco is full of lies, corruption and misrepresentations to mislead the public. 99% of it from the ACSEF spokespeople like Smith and Willox and encouraged by Aberdeen Journals
Keith Stirton
Report this comment

Why should we be surprised that ACSEF have as they say "cooked the books" in thier favour with the "5000" businesses. A bit like their "Public Consultation" All one sided. Just wondered in the EE today their is an Oil related business has gone into administration. Hope this is not one of the "5000". The ACSEF and Wood (don't like to use the Sir as that means a gentleman) have cajoled, pressurised and blinkdsided workers, etc into voting for his "Vision" They have been relentless along with the press in their pursuit of it. Is it because ACSEF have got nothing else to show for all the money that has been thrown at them??? They are practically begging now. The dirty and underhanded way they have dealt with the whole project is it any wonder that people are so disgustedd with them. An already passed plans and most of the funding the overall spending less than Woods milllions. To come in with such a heavy handed approach is beneath contempt. I know what I would like Wood to do with mis millions. If he is so stubborn and besootted with his "Vision" He has more than enough to pay for it himself. At least it would save us a lot of money. With a bankrupt council and businneses closing down. Just where does he think the money will come from. Certainly not the governmnet. They have too many fingers in pies and cannot pay for any of them. Aberdeen bypass, Forth road bridge, the Referendum paper. The whole lot are broke. so leave the plans for Peacock in place. They were there first and they have the best project anyway. All this for a stubborn old man with too much money. and not forgetting his hanger on sycophants.
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

I think the editor needs to retract the assertion that: 5000 Firms Unite in Support of UTG. I hope a more professional editor can be sought for this publication. The people of ASberdeen deserve journalists with integrity not these amateurs.
Alan Craigie
Report this comment

Mr Willox (you are biased anyway being a member of the Acsef board) and Bob Collier your egos are worse than that of Sir I Wood in making decisions for your membership without consultation - both should resign your positions - if the UTG project was the "“catalyst” for regenerating the region" then God help the people of the NE - productive jobs that give men and women self esteem is what is needed to regenerate the NE not concrete slabs or art galleries for the elitist snobs nor more pubs, clubs and casinos
Thomas Owenson
Report this comment

Again more hypocrasy - The comments in this pages regarding the people against Woods project were slammed as they were not the views of the majority of Aberdonians. But now we have these ACSEF and the Chamber of Commerce speaking on behalf of folk who did not even know it. Just makes you wonder how much corruption is going on here. Wood, Stewart Milne and goodness knows who all are telling their employees to vote for his project. So much for the DEMOCRATIC public vote. If this is how our councils both Aberdeen and shire do business. it is no wonder we are in a recession. Ok Nasty thoughts - how much is Wood promising to help out these companies or committees. All this talk we hear about the amount he has donw for the city. - What - he changed from fishing to oil when he saw the market. Not for anyones benefit but his own. The money that has been squandered on this display of utter selfishness is astounding, as they all try and bend over backwards for the crumbs from Woods.
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

Why is everyone all of a sudden now bangin on about 'talking over a compromise solution'? a few months ago Ian Wood wouldnt have even nudged at hearing of any other options but his own, he'd provide a new ars centre fair enough, but to be placed where he sees fit in his massive bunker.. Now all of a sudden, another consultation and talking process is needed. This last one took over two long years, and it's still not come up with anything decent. Why cant the Peacock project just start on site, and ASCEF can 'talk about another option' all they like over the next however many years they want, in the meantime we'l get a landmark building and bring the gardens back to life, and not risk losing this amazing oppurtunity that's been sidelined for so damn long. THe PVA scheme only takes up a small portion of the site, there's plenty left to deck over, mostly the massive stretch of the dual carriage way. We've got a robust design that's been considered, budgeted, approved by planning, and is just sittin there withering away while ASCEF and businessmen faff about with useless self centered pipe dreams. These 'visions' with no substance whatsoever, no realistic budget, and no decent design aspirations can afford to wait, the PVA project cant, so why not just stop comong up with more time consuming nonsense and just build the thing already?
Ved Mij
Report this comment

The Press and Journal is happy to encourage discussion and debate on the topics featured within our newspaper and on our website.

However, we would urge people to respect the opinions of others even if they do not agree with them. We will not tolerate abusive comments of any type and such posts will be removed with the people responsible facing a ban from this website.

Only registered users can supply comments, and your registered name and location will automatically be appended to any comment that you upload.

We reserve the right to remove comments from anyone using a false name or pseudonym.

To post a comment, please login using the form at the top of the page, or click to register.