north

The resignations of all of the above, would be a very good place to start to bring the SIC into a new era of openess and a complete reset. I would suggest that Pat Watters takes a little time to educate himself on the activities of Convener Cluness, to understand where such a level of dissatisfaction and distrust comes from. As far as victimisation - not another claim of this? Everyone in the entire fiasco is now claiming victimisation. The correct term is incompetence, and there is certainly plenty of that flowing around the SIC today. There is only one solution to this abhorrent disaster that has been conjured up by all parties involved - ensure that EVERYONE is in full command of the FACTS. It will be easy and straightforward once we have all seen the facts and understand the options and road to the decisions made by the Council. And finally to the fine leader of COSLA. Before you start deriding the fine electorate of Shetland and the position that many have taken on the activities and decisions of the Convener, remember that the elected councillors of the SIC themselves selected Councillor Cluness as their leader - NOT the electorate. As you are probably far too busy to read all the instances and occurrences that might have brought people to this decision, and I am far too busy to take the time to educate you, I'll leave you with just one example. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/north_east/6925265.stm

Which one of the FACTS you stated there do you not like, jz? I see absolutely nothing in your quote that falls into any of the categories above. I am proud that mighty leaders of the Mighty Shetland Banana Republic are so keen on the supression of information, opinion and comment and following precisely the instructions included in "The Complete Dictator and Totalitarian Manual". President Mugabe would be proud of your efforts!

I understand that the Right Honourable Gordon Brown may be available in the recruiting time frame. He would appear to be eminently capable of running the SIC based on his past history. Gordon's availability will of course be in the hands of the electorate; something that the current incumbents of the Town Hall might want to pay very close attention to.

I was wondering if Ken Dodd was available? He would fit right in.

Our esteemed Convener seems to have some interesting and varied viewpoints on litigation. This extremely sound advice might have been taken by the individual giving it when he started a ridiculous battle over the Bressay Bridge. It might be even more worthwhile for him to take his own advice with the decision he rammed through the other week on the Charitable Trust? I would much rather have seen a high profile case with Mr. Clark, than the other cases listed above. Maybe there are personal skeletons in the closet? I am confident we might guess who was driving the decision based on the two examples above.

http://www.shetland-news.co.uk/2010/February/news/Outcry%20over%20offer%20to%20Clark.htm There is only one reason why this statement would be made, or would require to be made. Incompetency in the Leadership of the elected body. When are the Councillors going to realise that not only are they the SOLE cause of the problem (or their own internally elected leadership), and that ONLY they have the ability to remedy it and reorganise this disgraceful mess. The voters don't get a chance to have their say until the next election, so YOU have to remedy the inadequate leadership that has driven the SIC into this disasterous situation. I know there are able individuals on this council who are capable of resolving this situation. Unfortunately, the longer it goes on, the greater the likelihood that no-one is going to want to touch it with a ten-foot barge pole. Both the elected and executive leadership do not appear to have the management skills and experience to run a large local Government organisation - so turf them out on their ear! Let's get on with it.

And on the other hand, they agree to provide funding to the Shetland College: for a programme that was not in the budget, not on the radar, and had NEVER even been considered before last week. The enticement of "free" money, yet again drives home an easy sell and throws all pretence of an orderly budgeting process out the window. Of course all this occurred right in the middle of the biggest budget shortfall the council has ever faced, and in the midst of commitments to slash expenditures and maintain financial restraint, an orderly commitment to save money by slashing social and cultural programmes, and now this? They are like drug addicts, they just can't stay away from spending from the vast pot of gold. I have absolutely nothing against the Shetland College, but I do have a major reservation about this supposed new found commitment to fiscal responsibility and accountability that the council commited itself to only days before this. If you are either young or old and not in the workforce, prepared to get screwed. They amazingly find money for this project in the budget. They amazingly found 5.3 million in last years budget for the Single Status pay scheme - all of this sounds like sloppy accounting or a budget that should be screwed down to harder to find the savings they want withour hitting Shetland's most vulnerable citizens. Seems to me like business as usual. I would like to publicly thank the Councillors that have the balls to openly fight all this nonsense that is going on in the council. Come election time, the electorate will remember who you are; although I am very concerned that some of the best representatives on this council will have had their fill at the end of these unbelievable activities that the council is currently preoccupied with, and decide not to bother any more. Mods - you really should unlock my very fair and balanced poll on SIC budgeting capabilites!

Yet again, the SIC lurches into yet another budget dilemma and all kinds of threats of service reduction - and some pretty sound budget cutting concepts as well. But what will happen when it hits the council for a decision? The Council seems to be incapable of making hard fiscal decisions to live within its means - so this should be a good test of their commitment. And in the meantime, money pours out to consultants and various "experts" on all kinds of crap that may or may not have any value. Plus, we have the added excitement of yet another potentially expensive legal battle to ensure the status quo of the Charitable Trust - more millions of Shetland's money wasted? I will watch with great interest the direction of the budget discussion and the the actions of individual councillors on the outcome! http://www.shetland-news.co.uk/2010/February/news/Tough%20times%20ahead%20for%20SIC.htm [***mod edit - thread locked as subject matter is amply covered elsewhere and poll is not balanced or representative***]

The people in the trenches should not be the ones that carry the can if the venture fails to meet it's budgeted performance - for that the responsibility lies much higher up the food chain.

Then we will have to sit back and watch the outcome. There is no point debating the potential outcome of any venture that at this point exists only a financial spreadsheet. The first day of reckoning will come at the end of the commisioning phase when the build costs are reviewed. The second will be at the end of the first year of operation, when the forecast utilisation and revenues can be examined. I have never really had a position one way or another on the building of Mareel, and I think there is certainly a requirement for a venue of this type in Shetland. That being said, I have no great faith in the financial abilities or acumen of those tasked to bring it home. As the SIC's own finance officials put it; http://www.hi-arts.co.uk/july08-feature-mareel-lerwick.htm

The Mareel Business Plan is built around the same concept of the Leisure Centres, Restaurants and other SIC "ventures". Smoke and Mirrors, unviable plans and no accountability. The only people that lost their jobs at the Clickimin were the poor old employees; not the financial geniuses who wrote the plan or anyone involved in the management or execution. There is nothing wrong with building and funding Mareel from a realistic approved budget - this is NOT what happened - it is built on an unrealistic imaginary financial model that will NEVER work. Fortunately a couple of councillors were prepared to make that known. Who will lose their job when it fails to meet it's financial goals?

Gimme a break. No biscuits for trustees FUTURE meetings of Shetland Charitable Trust will again be held in the council chamber after trustees heard that this would be the most cost effective option. Previously, trustees had moved from Lerwick Town Hall to the Clickimin Centre in a bid to demonstrate its independence from the council, but found the acoustics in the gym hall not to be up to the job. A report yesterday (Thursday) told trustees that they could hold their regular meetings in the town hall for £77.25 per meeting or opt for the Islesburgh community centre where room 16 would cost them £94. In a closely fought contest the town hall option, proposed by Betty Fullerton, won by 11 votes to nine against Islesburgh, put forward by Laura Baisley. Mrs Baisley had argued that Islesburgh was less crowded and, importantly, also served biscuits with the coffee.

Thanks, MJ. It will be very interesting for everyone in Shetland to read how their representative voted on an issue which is almost guaranteed to become a huge financial liability for the people of Shetland. As I watch the current leadership fritter away the foundations of a financial legacy that was designed to benefit Shetlanders for generations, I really wonder what they believe their remit is, and if they truly believe they are in any way responsible to the electorate - it certainly doesn't seeem that way to me. Sandy Cluness will retire in 2012 as well as many of the individuals that are supporting his decisions - although I'm not sure they have a firm grasp of the fact that their tenure is in the hands of the voter! So, we will enter into yet another phase of expensive evaluation, filled with more lawyers and consultants sucking on the SIC moomin - and after all the discussion and argument, they will restructure the CT and arrive at the exact same decision they have just voted against. There is one thing for sure when you get a lawyer involved - there will be plenty more of them involved in the future - all with their clocks running and their hands out. The CT decision runs in a similar vein to the horrifyingly stupid decisions on the Bressay Bridge - how much will that end up costing us? Or Smyril Line - and the "forgotten" undeclared personal compensation. Thankfully, there are still as couple of members of this council that are independent thinkers, capable of examining the information at hand and working for the benefit of the PEOPLE of Shetland - not the representatives of Shetland. Getting rid of David Clark is just the first part of the resolution for putting the SIC in order. The next one involves the leadership of the elected body and the lemmings that blindly follow it's lead.

I am very interested in seeeing exactly which Councillors voted which way? How do I get this information? I would also like to see if Council members who carried this vote can be personally held responsible for any expenses that the ensuing (pointless) legal battle will cost the resources of the people of Shetland. Getting rid of Davis Clark is only the first step in clearing this insidious waste of the resources of the people of Shetland. The rot in the organisation starts at the top, and infects all the weak parts below. Time for some MAJOR change.

According to Wikipedia, it is to return in 2010! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creamola_Foam I always remember, when I was maybe seven, my Great Uncle telling me to never confuse Creamola Foam with Andrews Liver Salts - which came in a very similar looking can, sitting right next to the Creamola Foam can on the kitchen shelf. I can't tell you how many times I got them mixed up and tasted that vile Liver Salt mixture! What the hell where Liver Salts anyway, and what did they do for you?

And yet another topic needing resolution for the council from both a practical and legal standpoint. Let's get to work.

Time for this entire matter to be brought back to life. One problem looks like it is currently being addressed. Now it is time to deal with the root cause!

Well, it looks like this sad state of affairs is entering it's final act. Mainlander suggested that the removal of Mr. Clark might be a cause for celebration for many; but I personally feel sad that this situation has ever arisen, both for him, and the rest of us - he is a real live person. That said, many of these issues originate from his own actions and decisions - and life and his position demand responsibility and accountability for this. In reviewing this thread, I have read a number of things that have been quite surprising, so I started looking a little deeper. Anyone know more? Paul Gatrill is an employee (perhaps owner?) of Kingsley Associates, not Kingsley and Associates. One appears to be a small operation, the other a large international organisation! I have no idea of his past or current dealings, but have no reason to doubt his description on the Dalzell website. Indeed, he gets an excellent reference form another of Dalzell's associates. His current activities however, seem to be on a much smaller scale - renovating a basement flat in London. http://www.crambanddean.co.uk/cd6.htm But perhaps far more interesting and enlightening to me, is the following from 29 July 199; http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/aberdeen/bs-stonewalls-over-dalzell-plant-1.748933 I had no idea that Mr. Clark had ever been involved in politics at this level before!

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-great-global-warming-collapse/article1458206/ It is comforting to know that there is at least one participant on this forum who always has all the answers and is never wrong! If only I had such confidence in my abilities - alas I am merely mortal! Sometimes it just seems to be a lot like the paranoia over Swine flu. Just like an assembly of elderly shoe repairers! And sometimes there really is excellent advice on this forum. Of course it might be open to reverse interpretation? Have a wonderful evening.

Mainlander said: Don't tell us that YOU have been sleeping with the Chief Executive of the SIC as well?

Let's take a little look at the source of this information? http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/07/truth-about-realclimateorg.html

A Managing Director who fails to perform or fit into the Corporation will be replaced in an instant by the Board and Shareholders. The individuals responsible for recruiting such a poor performing individual should rightfully be concerned about their own tenure as well. Accountability and responsibility are the prime tenets of any corporate structure. The difference between a Corporation and a Local Government is that in a corporate structure, the Shareholders as the ultimate owners, have the right to elect the Board; and the same right to remove them - and ultimately the entire executive structure by means of an Extraordinary Meeting. In Government, the poor old voters have to wait for the election schedule. In the business world, non-performance will end in non-employment. This is precisely the action that should be taken by the SIC in this instance.

I don't see how that would disqualify anyone from this position. Look at the total balls-up all this high-priced, highly educated and highly experienced help has brought to the table!

Hopefully, today will mark the start of a new era within the SIC. New jobs, new faces, responsibility, accountability and the interests of the Shetland people, over those of the current SIC leaders and executive. Cull all of those responsible and move on to a new and vastly different regime. It may take some pain and money to be able to move toward the future, but let's just get on with it. For all those council members who think they can get away with simply sitting on the fence, just do everyone a favour and tender your resignation today. You are responsible to the electorate for the ridiculous and embarrassing state of the current administration and need to lead the move toward remedial action. Let's see some serious change and genuine intent to work for the benefit of all Shetlanders. I look forward to the outcome of today's meeting and salute those members who have the integrity to drive the move toward change and resolution. You have the support of a large number of the Shetland population. Let's do what needs to be done.

This story just about sums up the hypocracy of the entire Copenhagen Summit and Global Warming Industry. I expect Al Gore will be there in his Gulfstream and rented Limo, just like the rest of them. All you followers are the biggest load of suckers ever. Copenhagen climate summit: 1,200 limos, 140 private planes and caviar wedges Copenhagen is preparing for the climate change summit that will produce as much carbon dioxide as a town the size of Middlesbrough. By Andrew Gilligan Published: 10:55PM GMT 05 Dec 2009 On a normal day, Majken Friss Jorgensen, managing director of Copenhagen's biggest limousine company, says her firm has twelve vehicles on the road. During the "summit to save the world", which opens here tomorrow, she will have 200. "We thought they were not going to have many cars, due to it being a climate convention," she says. "But it seems that somebody last week looked at the weather report." Climate Express sets off for Copenhagen Ms Jorgensen reckons that between her and her rivals the total number of limos in Copenhagen next week has already broken the 1,200 barrier. The French alone rang up on Thursday and ordered another 42. "We haven't got enough limos in the country to fulfil the demand," she says. "We're having to drive them in hundreds of miles from Germany and Sweden." And the total number of electric cars or hybrids among that number? "Five," says Ms Jorgensen. "The government has some alternative fuel cars but the rest will be petrol or diesel. We don't have any hybrids in Denmark, unfortunately, due to the extreme taxes on those cars. It makes no sense at all, but it's very Danish." The airport says it is expecting up to 140 extra private jets during the peak period alone, so far over its capacity that the planes will have to fly off to regional airports – or to Sweden – to park, returning to Copenhagen to pick up their VIP passengers. As well 15,000 delegates and officials, 5,000 journalists and 98 world leaders, the Danish capital will be blessed by the presence of Leonardo DiCaprio, Daryl Hannah, Helena Christensen, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Prince Charles. A Republican US senator, Jim Inhofe, is jetting in at the head of an anti-climate-change "Truth Squad." The top hotels – all fully booked at £650 a night – are readying their Climate Convention menus of (no doubt sustainable) scallops, foie gras and sculpted caviar wedges. At the takeaway pizza end of the spectrum, Copenhagen's clean pavements are starting to fill with slightly less well-scrubbed protesters from all over Europe. In the city's famous anarchist commune of Christiania this morning, among the hash dealers and heavily-graffitied walls, they started their two-week "Climate Bottom Meeting," complete with a "storytelling yurt" and a "funeral of the day" for various corrupt, "heatist" concepts such as "economic growth". The Danish government is cunningly spending a million kroner (£120,000) to give the protesters KlimaForum, a "parallel conference" in the magnificent DGI-byen sports centre. The hope, officials admit, is that they will work off their youthful energies on the climbing wall, state-of-the-art swimming pools and bowling alley, Just in case, however, Denmark has taken delivery of its first-ever water-cannon – one of the newspapers is running a competition to suggest names for it – plus sweeping new police powers. The authorities have been proudly showing us their new temporary prison, 360 cages in a disused brewery, housing 4,000 detainees. And this being Scandinavia, even the prostitutes are doing their bit for the planet. Outraged by a council postcard urging delegates to "be sustainable, don't buy sex," the local sex workers' union – they have unions here – has announced that all its 1,400 members will give free intercourse to anyone with a climate conference delegate's pass. The term "carbon dating" just took on an entirely new meaning. At least the sex will be C02-neutral. According to the organisers, the eleven-day conference, including the participants' travel, will create a total of 41,000 tonnes of "carbon dioxide equivalent", equal to the amount produced over the same period by a city the size of Middlesbrough. The temptation, then, is to dismiss the whole thing as a ridiculous circus. Many of the participants do not really need to be here. And far from "saving the world," the world's leaders have already agreed that this conference will not produce any kind of binding deal, merely an interim statement of intent. Instead of swift and modest reductions in carbon – say, two per cent a year, starting next year – for which they could possibly be held accountable, the politicians will bandy around grandiose targets of 80-per-cent-plus by 2050, by which time few of the leaders at Copenhagen will even be alive, let alone still in office. Even if they had agreed anything binding, past experience suggests that the participants would not, in fact, feel bound by it. Most countries – Britain excepted – are on course to break the modest pledges they made at the last major climate summit, in Kyoto. And as the delegates meet, they do so under a shadow. For the first time, not just the methods but the entire purpose of the climate change agenda is being questioned. Leaked emails showing key scientists conspiring to fix data that undermined their case have boosted the sceptic lobby. Australia has voted down climate change laws. Last week's unusually strident attack by the Energy Secretary, Ed Miliband, on climate change "saboteurs" reflected real fear in government that momentum is slipping away from the cause. In Copenhagen there was a humbler note among some delegates. "If we fail, one reason could be our overconfidence," said Simron Jit Singh, of the Institute of Social Ecology. "Because we are here, talking in a group of people who probably agree with each other, we can be blinded to the challenges of the other side. We feel that we are the good guys, the selfless saviours, and they are the bad guys." As Mr Singh suggests, the interesting question is perhaps not whether the climate changers have got the science right – they probably have – but whether they have got the pitch right. Some campaigners' apocalyptic predictions and religious righteousness – funeral ceremonies for economic growth and the like – can be alienating, and may help explain why the wider public does not seem to share the urgency felt by those in Copenhagen this week. In a rather perceptive recent comment, Mr Miliband said it was vital to give people a positive vision of a low-carbon future. "If Martin Luther King had come along and said 'I have a nightmare,' people would not have followed him," he said. Over the next two weeks, that positive vision may come not from the overheated rhetoric in the conference centre, but from Copenhagen itself. Limos apart, it is a city filled entirely with bicycles, stuffed with retrofitted, energy-efficient old buildings, and seems to embody the civilised pleasures of low-carbon living without any of the puritanism so beloved of British greens. And inside the hall, not everything is looking bad. Even the sudden rush for limos may be a good sign. It means that more top people are coming, which means they scent something could be going right here. The US, which rejected Kyoto, is on board now, albeit too tentatively for most delegates. President Obama's decision to stay later in Copenhagen may signal some sort of agreement between America and China: a necessity for any real global action, and something that could be presented as a "victory" for the talks. The hot air this week will be massive, the whole proceedings eminently mockable, but it would be far too early to write off this conference as a failure.