MSP wants to know if ‘square’ plan has support

By Morag Lindsay

Published: 27/03/2010

Organisers of the consultation into Sir Ian Wood’s £150million city square plan in Aberdeen have been urged to reveal as quickly as possible whether or not the scheme has the support of the 10,000 people who took part.

The call has been made by Aberdeen Central MP Lewis Macdonald after the economic development group conducting the vote on Sir Ian’s behalf said the results would not be known until April 13.

The publication date is two weeks beyond the funding deadline for Peacock Visual Arts to take up a £4.3million grant from the Scottish Arts Council for a new centre in Union Terrace Gardens.

The arts organisation called a temporary halt to its £13.5million scheme after the Wood Group chairman said he was willing to put up £50million towards a five-acre civic square on the site of the gardens and the Denburn dual-carriageway and railway line.

The arts council has already extended its deadline to the end of this month to allow the consultation to take place and has said it will review its position then.

Sir Ian says he will proceed only if it can be proved that the development has the support of the public. Earlier he said he feared apathy could spell the end for his plan.

Mr Macdonald has now written to project leader Dave Blackwood, of Aberdeen City and Shire Economic Future, to ask if the group can say if the public has given the city square a Yes or No while the rest of the data is analysed.

He said: “Since the consultation closed, I have been contacted by a number of constituents who are concerned at the delay in announcing the outcome.

“Given the importance attached by Sir Ian Wood to support for his proposals, the key question would appear to be whether or not these proposals commanded clear support from the majority of respondents, and it is difficult to see why there should be such a delay in publishing this information.”

Chairman Tom Smith said the consultation team was working “flat out” to produce their report as quickly as possible.

“We appreciate the concern Peacock and others may have over the uncertainty of their situation, but we have to remember that the city square is a major economic development and regeneration project.”

Reader's Comments

Tom Smith is getting pretty good at avoiding the Yes or No question. We all know they have the answer to Lewis Macdonald's question and it is not in their favor. They are trying to put as much spin on it as they can but at the end of the day No means NO. How despicable of them to try and scupper Peacocks development by running down the clock on their funding. When this is all over hopefully ACC will sack the lot of them. (Acsef)
Robert Horne
Report this comment

So Tom Thumb and his colleagues are working flat out. Really? If this kind of messing around isn't reminiscent of Mugabe, then what is? This is how the erosion of democracy begins. The civic square is now a "major regeneration project" that will destroy the last bit of green in the city and will become a car park for 490 cars. Acsef are rooted in the past, when the systematic destruction of this city happened. Fenton Wyness hit the nail on the head when he predicted, three decades ago, that the city would fall from architectural grace. The Bon Accord centre saw the beginning of the end of Union Street as a major shopping thoroughfare. It has become a city of covered-in consumerism where everything can be bought without having to brave 'wind an' weet'. In his poem 'Vandalism' A.M. Davidson looked around and saw only 'caul gless and concrete'. 'Gweed Lord' he cried, 'ye've fair made a sair soss o' my Bon-Accord'......and Ian Wood and his Acsef henchmen are going to continue the job.
dorothy bothwell
Report this comment

The delaying tactics are only to be expected from ACSEF/Wood. They want this scheme to go ahead. Goodness knows why as it will not rejunivate the city instead it will destroy the area. The ones who are in favour of this vandalism are the business sector, because it "Might" generate more money for them. This is not done in the name of the citizens good, but for the greed on these business people. It would seem that our city and surrounding areas do not belong any more to the citizens but to the millionaires (of which there are quite a few here) running things for their own benefit. If and that is a big IF Wood concedes that his "Vision" is not wanted, will he stand down. I do not think so. ASCEF with Tom and Wood will bluff, lie and do anyting to get their own way. They have proved that already. Shame on the lot of them. After all ACSEF is a public body. Would you think so with their actions.
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

So Tom Smith says “We appreciate the concern Peacock and others may have over the uncertainty of their situation, but we have to remember that the city square is a major economic development and regeneration project.” Does this have any bearing whatsoever on the question about yes/no? Of course not. So why is Smith coming out with this line? During the consultation Acsef were desperate to emphasis that the CSP was "civic and not commercial", yet now it's a "major economic development project". If the yes/no question had demonstrated support for the CSP, then we can be sure that Acsef's PR would be hollering that result from the rooftops. It's clear that the answer will be a resounding "no" and that Acsef are attempting to wind the clock down on PVA's funding whilst coming up with some new spin to enable them to keep going. Aberdeen City Council has given a flat "no" to capital funding for this project, which will seriously prejudice Acsef's ability to raise other public funds. When will they get back to their senses and back the existing project, the one that people actually want?
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

If the results of a general election, counting millions of votes, can be announced in a matter of hours of the polls closing, why does the count of a few thousand votes take weeks?
Ron Campbell
Report this comment

The results of this vote are meaningless. The vote wasn't conducted in a fair or scientific manner. It's at best a straw poll held by a biased party. It's ridiculous to ask people to vote on a development without telling them how it's to be paid for. It's just another waste of public money. I'll vote for any council candidate that proposes stopping funding of ACSEF.
Alan Craigie
Report this comment

The results of this vote are meaningless. The vote wasn't conducted in a fair or scientific manner. It's at best a straw poll held by a biased party. It's ridiculous to ask people to vote on a development without telling them how it's to be paid for. It's just another waste of public money. I'll vote for any council candidate that proposes stopping funding of ACSEF.
Alan Craigie
Report this comment

Throughout the 'consultation process', there was a continual drip-feed from ACSEF to their media organs about how many people had voted, how the vote was going, etc. And now they tell us they can't tot up 10,000 votes? This whole episode has been the most hideous embarrassment. If ACSEF are seriously representative of the 'business elite' of the once-proud Royal Burgh of Aberdeen, then God help us!
Alex Mitchell
Report this comment

I defiantly do not support Sir Ian Wood’s City square & as a member of the public I suggest that he keeps his blood money in his tight wallet. But however I do support his idea of a tea plantation? The Union terrace slope will be excellent for a tea plantation!!!
Fiona Cooper
Report this comment

I wonder if it would be possible to make a complaint about ACSEF to the Audit Commission or the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman.
James Edwards
Report this comment

Liked the little photo of Wood next to the lock in at the UTG. All about how generous he is about tea planting. Just had to get that in, just in case we forgot his "generosity". As said above, why is it taking so long to count the votes???? Probably because they are trying to find ways of doubling each vote cast. So that the sums come out in their favour. It is obvious that there was and is nothing truthful from ACSEF/Wood regarding the gardens. Never used, full of junkies/alcoholics, no sun, trees are dying etc etc etc. Nothing substantial in any of their "public consultation". I think it would be a good idea to complain to the Audit Commission about the way that ACSEF have conducted this project. They certainly have nothing to be proud or. Time the council had a good look and sack most of them. If this is business we are in deep trouble for the future.
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

Totally agree the Audit commission should be brought in to investigate.Lets face it are the people of Aberdeen going to be told the truth about the outcome of the so called public consultation? I believe whatever the outcome is they will go ahead with it anyway.
Stan Domeracki
Report this comment

Good idea how do we go about doing that, any suggestions?
Robert Horne
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.