Carlos

No, 2800 full time equivalent posts in the council, for all workers. Of which 2000 came under the control of "Education and Social Care". So 800ish posts for everybody else: Finance, Ports and Harbours, Ferries, Roads, Planning, Town Hall, Transport, Legal etc. As I understood it anyhow. It'd be interesting to see a more detailed breakdown.

I heard that the figures given in the management reorganisation showed about 2800 full time equivalent posts in the council, with 2000 of them in Education & Social Care...... It'd seem from that that significant job cuts would either be a fair hit on a politically difficult area, or a huge hit on other areas?

Until, October/November is it? When the Education budget has to find the same (much larger) % cuts as all the others this time?

At the moment the Whalsay terminal needs to be replaced and will cost a fair bit. But if you decided to change to ramp landing then you'd still need to replace the terminal, but do works to the other 2 terminals and order 2 or 3 new ferries, all at the same time too? Unless your terminals were built/adapted to be able to handle both kinds of ferry.... We might have been better off going with that type of ferries 35 years ago, not least for the chance to buy and sell 2nd hand ferries to other Scottish islands, but it'd take a real long term view to write off infrastructure now and start fresh..... You'd go a whole cycle (20 years?) at higher costs before you started with any savings?

Scrap all the ferries and terminals and rebuild all of them at the same time? Or scrap them piecemeal and have problems in the meantime if you had to switch ferries round for breakdown/maintenance cover? Of course the other difference with the Crommarty ferry is that it runs 8:00 am to 6:15 pm and carries 4 cars....

Above water and through sandstone so soft they did not bore the tunnels, but had normal large digger down the tunnel. But in other ways a project that was run under a lot of restrictions. I had a look to try and see how it might compare and ended up with no real idea Likewise I'm suspicious of a consultant looking for business that says "Ah, look, go with us and it'll be cheaper than you think. We promise". Their priced design also seems to come with a list of unpriced changes that'd be needed to meet EU standards too. I think the last(?) SIC report had input from the Norwegian government department that runs the tunnel contracts over there? I'd hope that one was fairly realistic on base costs and contingencies?

Their money comes from the Recreational Trust, so while those budgets have been and likely will be trimmed again too, I don't think anything ends up as a direct part of this Council exercise?

http://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/shetlandwordsdictionary ? Is it easy enough to make e.g. a Firefox speller checker plug-in from that kind of source material?

The pedestrianisation times on the street also apply to cyclists, although there could be a fair bit of enforcement done on a lot of vehicles not following those.....

Hmm, in that way does private business not run exactly the same as the council/consultants? If you have specialised work that only comes up once a year, you don't pay extra to employ a specialist and end up keeping them on general duties for the other 50 weeks, you employ a general worker at a lower wage, and sub out the 2 weeks specialist work?

I maybe haven't been following Billy Fox in enough detail, but I am not sure where his own views vs representing the consistency sit? If the council held a referendum on VE and the got a "yes" vote, would Billy then be happy to work to ensuring the project went ahead with the best benefits to Shetland?

They should show suitable experience and qualifications in advance for sure, but a big percentage of folk that could show that would likely still end up with a report that'd lead to "B####y consultants, waste of money!" posts...... As Spinner says, we wait and hope for new insight and ideas, but maybe that is too optimistic a hope.....

How does the graph of oil discoveries against time look just now? A peak oil book I read showed the discovery of oil reserves in barrels over the years and showed that peaking a long way back (30's was it?) There's obviously going to be a time gaps between discovery and getting the last barrel out, but if the discovery rate peaks, then extraction at the same rate is not sustainable. Maybe their graph was skewed though? It still leaves us with the problem though - if it is not peak oil then production rates have to increase year on year, and if that is to be sustainable then the total reserves need to increase year on year. Are discoveries consistently ahead of production? I think that is more or less one of the peak oil effects predicted too......

I would agree that we don't know much about what is going on, but I don't think that knowing all the details of the brief/experience/past history would necessarily help very much at the moment anyhow? It's going to be hard to know how good a job they did until the final report comes out?

If it doesn't increase, then that is effectively "peak oil" though, the peak of the production rate - when roughly half the available oil has been extracted, not when it runs out?

There is speculation on the futures market that is driving up international petrol prices, but whether that is just financiers acting to make more money or the first signs of the price rises predicted by peak oil.....

They have reccomended refusal because it is against the existing policy - that's about all they have power to do. The councilors can consider if they want to make an exception, or if they want to change the policy, the officials can't.

The order comes down from the Council meeting - "Cut all budgets by 7%!", goes through the department heads to the folk in charge of individual budgets. The guy with the toilets budget has a look at how to save the 7% he has been told he has to do, and sends back his bit saying to do that you would have to shut a toilet. The councilors decide to go with the 7% savings and that they will shut the toilet......

The councilors?

Might be one or two with EU plaques, Muckle Roe Bridge for one, but mostly just a little modern tradition.

Sorry, was talking about the small boat harbour, in case it wasn't clear. Pretty sure they don't need planning permission for the "harbour works" i.e. the sea wall. How far inland of that they can work before they do need it I'm not sure. As far as the OP, then yes, it'd be needed.

I might be wrong, but I think that falls under harbour ground and as such LPA did not have to get planning permission?

The report itself http://www.jmt.org/news.asp?s=2&nid=JMT-N10561

If the neightbour info was not correct would it potentially invalidate the planning permission?

Not the most readable report, but lots of information in there on all kinds of overall effects from different power sources THE INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH IMPACTS OF ELECTRICITY GENERATION http://www.ieahydro.org/reports/ST3-020613b.pdf