Jump to content

Mareel - Cinema & Music Venue


madcow
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Anonymous
"I would have said there was about 40/50. That included a small delegation from the Arts Trust"

 

Having just had time to fully read your pages (in my own time I would add) I would like to congratulate Marvin, among others, for putting forward a balanced and substantiated scepticism toward this project. I may not fully agree with him (is fixing up a number of old and stucturally unknown buildings really the most cost effective and best quality option in the short or long term?) but at least he seeks to add substance and reasoned agruement to his case, and for that alone 'we' are more than happy to have further discussions with him as a newly co-opted member of the Cinema and Music Centre steering committee.

 

I would just like to correct him on the above quote. Shetland Arts Trust did not have a "small delegation" at the meeting. The only person from the Arts Trust who attended was me. The only other person in the audience remotely connected with the project was Caroline Miller from the publicly elected project steering committee.

 

Everyone else there who was "pro" came of their own account - although I know a number will chose to believe otherwise. Had I decided to encourage other pro folk to attend I would like to think I could have increased those number dramatically, but had no reason to do so.

 

Secondly, someone asked me last night, re Wednesday nights meeting in the Garrison, "where were all those FOR the venue"? Given the tone of the 'invite' to the meeting this can hardly be deemed surprising and, lets be honest, given the relatively low turn-out of the so-called "silent majority", estimated at around 50 if you discount the pro's and 'neutrals' in the audience, it seems to me ironic that anyone now try and turn the tables in the opposite direction.

 

Finally the objectors at the same meeting, all apparently "concerned ratepayers", appear to have chosen to latch on to just ONE instance where a new arts development's capital expenditure went over budget - namely 'An Laantaire in the Western Isles'.

 

If indeed the public purse were their concern, surely they could also find similar instances of schools or bridges projects that suffered from this same problem during actual construction - but thankfully they do not appear to be directing their "concerns" toward other projects in the SIC's Capital Programme such as the Anderson High School or the Bressay bridge - who quite possibly could suffer the same level of risk.

 

I wonder why?

 

i have read this post and would like to add i am part of the silent morjority that is against the project in its present form.

 

i did not go to this meeting because i would have looked like i was backing the pubs and ther wories about their perseived loss in profits.

 

i do think they will be heeps of jobs for the boys as does many others

i do think that its a pipe dream that you will never fill the new place the way you think you will.

 

i do think we have great music here, but i dont think that 600 people will come out every weekend (at least) to listen to it.

 

i have notices how you have advoyed the point that the bang wagon you have used it the need for a cinema, and i have also noticed you are using councelers that have never been to a film in years, so what do they know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

As far as i know Islesburgh will still run the Garrison but it will be programed by the new Arts Agency, the islesburgh trust will eventualy close and the trust duties will all be done by the council (but its the same people) - apart from that Islesburgh will remain unchanged.

 

some groups and staff are moving to other council departments

 

The Arts Trust will close down on 31 April and the new Arts Agency will start in 1st April - note this is not just a name change, and the trust staff members are only talking at present as Arts Trust staff (or palls) - when the new bosses take over they (the staff and friends) may have to change that views to the new agency policies

 

As far as the public will see the films and productions in the Garrison will stay the same and the way Islesburgh is run will stay the same too.

 

Apart from davie can you think of anything they do?

 

So, after April the Arts Agency will be programming the Garrison - so lets see what a good job - or a mess they make of it, personely i think we will see no odds

 

The buildings will be owned by the council but managed by Islesburgh - so no change there, infact its just going back 10 years the way it all started before the Islesburgh trust took over from the council.

 

now correct me is in wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous
Just had a phone call as well on the subject of possible school closures v's the proposed cinema and music venue project, and although the issues are by no means related perhaps I SHOULD attempt to make the position clear.

 

I am disappointed that once again an association is being made in this context, as indeed it was at the SLTA meeting in the Garrison on Wednesday night It's almost a "how can you smile when someone is dying" allegation. Its also uphelpful to both parites to set a project v's issues arguement going when the two do not formally relate and can only cloud the real issues and arguements.

 

As I have said before they do not relate. although some have the persception that Shetland should not continue with projects such as these when belief exists that certain other unrelated amenities and serivces are threatened. I see no other public project being singled out in this particular fashion of course, but so be it.

 

Personally speaking I am not in favour of any school closures where their continued existence can be justified, although I would have personally thought the argement should be about access and quality of education not the actual number of schools it takes to provide it - but that is for someone else to decide not me and just a personal thought.

 

I have served on school boards in a voluntary capacity so have had direct experience of both ends of the arguement. Additionally, through the music development project, I do a great deal of work in direct partnership with the education sector throughout Shetland so I would like to think I know where my own thoughts and priorities lie in this respect.

 

Good education provision is vital for music development too, and we can all see the results via the number of terrific young musicians coming through the system - thats the only instance where this argument can be related and they do not conflict. To the best of my knowledge we also have widespread support for the Cinema and Music Centre plan from this particular sector

 

If I though for one moment that even one school, or any other vital amenity for that matter, that had full justification for staying open, were threatened or worst still required to close to fund even a percentage of a project like this I would not be supporting it - in fact personal morals dictate that I would be the first to pull out from supporting it

 

The fact of the matter is the two are not related whatever some happen to believe. Even if this money, especially the capital expenditure element, were saved tomorrow, it would or could not be used to fund schools to stay open - that would have to come from a very different budget, believe it or not. This is true in both a national and local funding context.

 

I am sure if the time comes any schools involved will make a very good business case for thier continued survival and good luck to them too. If however the opposite happens, and we all have emotions and sympathies in this direction, then lets hope it is for sound and demonstrable reasons and most importantly any young folk involved are not adversely affected by any changes within the educational system.

 

Things do move on and things change, good and bad alike, but as a community we cannot afford to stand still or argue that the status quo be maintained at all costs and at all times whatever the subject

 

Finally I also have direct assurance than any revenue deficit the venue may run at (and remember the business plan still shows a potential profit may be made in best case scenario) will NOT be funded from our local education budget.

 

Hope this makes things a bit clearer at least

 

 

THERE WAS 93 ON THE COUNTER !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

Fair comment but the business plan is only a costed "suggestion" at the moment. Three or four years down the line things could be very different and who knows what the best programme might be. It would be up to those operating the venue what it would actually be, nothing is set in tablets of stone, and it should be possible to work with another venue to put on alternative programmes to attract a different audience.

 

Davie,

 

Just a quick question. How much of the gigs that will take place in the new venue be instigated by the Venue (and/or Arts Trust) and how much is likely to come from private promotors? Has that been looked at....?

 

To explain my question further.... Will the manager of the venue be expected to book and provide the entertainment or will the venue be available to hire?

 

The reason I ask is that somebody asked me if I was not a bit annoyed that the venue would have a recording studio in it seeing as I had invested large sums in my own studio. I said no because I will always be able to undercut the new venue because I don't have the overheads. The same might be the case for the venue. The North Star will always be cheaper for a promotor to hire because the overheads will be less. If however, the hire price of the new venue is going to be subsidised then that will certainly be anti-competative.......just a thought (and another complication!).....I think I'm going to stop posting shortly...my keyboard is beginning to complain :)

.

 

Don't you people understand the difference between the public and private sector?....These 2 venues shouldn't be competing at all!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

I've newly discovered the site, (v good) and having read the preceding pages just have to get some things off my chest.

 

I object to 'Lerwick will benefit, us poor isles folk wont' - I've lived generally quite content in Lerwick for over 40 years without this facility. If it comes, it will benefit some people from all over Shetland, not 'lerwick'

 

Whatever it is allegedly costing the council to build, does anyone really believe it won't go over budget? Also, according to the figures in the ST on friday, a loss of 80K per annum appears to be based on at least 74,800 paying customers, a lot for a population of 22,000. Can anyone put a figure on how much other places (clickimin etc) will lose?

 

Finally, another 24 public sector jobs created in another loss making venture. Come on, lets buck the political trend, declare the Peoples Republic of Zetland, make Sandy Commissar instead of Convenor, and have the Council take over everything. We're nearly halfway there anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

Don't you people understand the difference between the public and private sector?....These 2 venues shouldn't be competing at all!!

 

Very much so.....

 

The difference and the conflicts have been highlighted throughout the whole thread.

 

No win no fee...........! SIC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can anyone put a figure on how much other places (clickimin etc) will lose?

 

 

How do you mean? The amount of business the Clickimin will loose if the Venue opens (which hasn't actually been discussed yet come to think of it) or how much the clickimin currently looses per year?

 

If its the latter then the sports facilities as a whole runs at a deficit of £2.4m per year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't you people understand the difference between the public and private sector?....These 2 venues shouldn't be competing at all!!

 

Very much so.....

 

The difference and the conflicts have been highlighted throughout the whole thread.

 

No win no fee...........! SIC

 

Your point? I'm not following what you're on about..... lawyers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...