Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 30th August 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Trump's £1bn plan 'will fuel global interest in North-east'



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 13 June 2008
By FRANK URQUHART
THE leader of Aberdeenshire Council yesterday said the £1 billion Trump golf resort plan could help entice global companies to the North-east.
Anne Robertson told the third day of the Menie development inquiry that Donald Trump's plan to create the "world's greatest golf course" in Scotland would also help to establish Aberdeenshire as a global tourism destination.

And she said the "nati
onal" importance of the massive development had, for her, outweighed any concerns about its environmental impact.

Mrs Robertson told the inquiry at the Aberdeen Exhibition and Conference Centre: "If you have a development such as this, then you have the prospect of not only rooting companies in the area, but also attracting others to come and locate their headquarters – perhaps their global headquarters – in this area."

Dr Christine Gore, the director of planning and environmental services, told the inquiry that the council's planning professionals were also in favour of the Trump plan going ahead.

She added: "It is the council's view that the development of a world-class tourist facility, based around the proposed golf course development, would have significant economic benefits for both the north-east of Scotland and Scotland as a whole."





The full article contains 206 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 12 June 2008 9:42 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Donald Trump
 
1

Buttress,

13/06/2008 00:04:55
Well, come on folks - today you can repeat it all again...
2

Buttress,

13/06/2008 00:08:31
World class tourist facility? A hotel, some timeshares and a load of houses on the coast of Aberdeen?

3

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 13/06/2008 00:08:42
That's Anne Robertson, leader of the ruling Lib Dem Group on Aberdeenshire council, putting Martin Ford and Debra Storr (also Aberdeenshire Lib Dems) to shame. She even speaks with more passion and eloquence on the matter than her senior colleague Nicol Stephen.

Interesting to confirm that: "the council's planning professionals were also in favour of the Trump plan going ahead".
4

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 13/06/2008 00:12:27
G'night Buttress

Well, you'll have dawn to dusk posting to look forward to tomorrow.
5

Mist001,

Marseille 13/06/2008 00:55:15
LOL@#1

Yeah, I think I'm going to duck out of it now. Same merde, different day.

Michael.
6

Maisie from Morningside,

13/06/2008 01:43:25
Somebody is a victim of.....

"Come into my car and I'll give you a sweetie."

syndrome.
7

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 13/06/2008 03:15:05
... could help entice global companies to the North-east

Quo the Torry Quine, "They need their heids examined."
8

TM,

LA, USA 13/06/2008 03:22:02
Apparently old Donald doesn't think much of the existing courses in Scotland as he said his will be the "Worlds Greatest Golf Course". Maybe when he is done he can build you a better castle in Edinburgh...
9

Beth Boyle,

NY 13/06/2008 04:55:00
Scotland has to pay a billion to have their landscape raped. WEIRD!
10

ConnorD,

13/06/2008 06:18:26
#9 But its OUR country, not yours. We decide.
11

overton,

balmedie 13/06/2008 06:51:28
Storr leathered and shown up as the embarrassing and abject idiot that she is.

By the way, who is this William Walton who whispers sweet nothings into Martin Ford's ear? I think the people of the North East should be told.

Trump opponent stopped in her tracks at inquiry
Councillor and leader go-head to-head
By David Ewen

Published: 12/06/2008


TYCOON: Donald Trump plans a £1bn development.
More Pictures
IT WAS a chance for Debra Storr to show her boss who knew best – but the campaigning councillor was stopped in her tracks.

The Aberdeenshire member was appearing at the public inquiry into Donald Trump’s golf plan for Balmedie.

And on the end of her attack was council leader Anne Robertson.

Ms Storr began by asking Mrs Robertson to recap on the debate that led to a council committee’s rejection of the plan.

But after several minutes Trump’s QC was forced to step in.

“I’m at a loss to know exactly where we might be going with this,” said Lord Colin Boyd.

Chairman James McCulloch agreed and said his “finger had been hovering” over the pause button.

“It’s a matter of record what happened at those meetings,” said Mr McCulloch.

Ms Storr tried to argue the council wasn’t behind the plan – despite 63 out 65 councillors showing support after it was called in by the Government for a ruling.

Only Ms Storr and her colleague Martin Ford, also an official objector at the inquiry, registered dissent at the December meeting.

Mrs Robertson said: “Individuals came to individual decisions.”

She accepted that this was not in the role of a planning authority, and that there had been acceptance that the plan for two courses, 500 houses and hotel did not comply with all of the council’s policies.

But in doing so she spiked Ms Storr’s guns. “We’re not getting anything from this line of questioning,” said one of Mr McCulloch’s colleagues.

The debate, Mrs Robertson said, was about whether the economic benefits outweighed other consider
12

Richard Taylor,

Aberdeen 13/06/2008 07:13:09
Cllr Stour is wasting her time. And everyone else's.

Let us not forget that Stour's colleague Numpty Stephen caused this with his "smell of sleaze" tosh. Aided & abetted beforehand by Ford & Stour.

And the hamster wheel begins again....the objectors on here will pontificate....the supporters like me will counter their bullsh*t with reason, much claptrap from those (eg. from Drumnadrochit) that don't even live in the area....oh well, here we go again! :-)
13

Richard Taylor,

Aberdeen 13/06/2008 07:14:28
Ooh - my brown envelope with U$ dollars has arrived in the post....LURVLEY....;-)
14

eric,

13/06/2008 08:06:38
loch lomond up for sale mr trump
15

Myosotis,

13/06/2008 09:23:44
11;

Quoting from the Aberdeen Evening Express proves that Overton is getting desperate for support.

This paper has been completely controlled by TIGLS for the past year, and has helped caused the present stand-off.

The EE`s pseudo tests of public opinion have given Donald a far rosier picture of support than actually exists. If he had grasped the basis and extent of the opposition, he might have compromised and then nearly everyone would have been happy.
16

overton,

balmedie 13/06/2008 09:38:26
15 Myosotis,

Yet again you chose to ignore historical facts:

1. Originally the EE and P&J mischievously undermined the application and assumed that the region supported a small minority of vocal and well organised objectors.
It was only after the rejection, at the hands of Ford, at the ISC meeting when the true public feeling was gauged that the EE and P&J conformed to popular opinion.

2. People in the region would have appreciated a sensible vote at the ISC meeting and an objective approach from Storr and Ford.

At yesterday's meeting Storr made a coplete and utter pigs ear of her 'cross examination' and was exposed as the fool that she is.
17

Buttress,

13/06/2008 10:05:35
Were you there then Overton?
18

Buttress,

13/06/2008 10:23:50
And here's Sir Simon in today's Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/13/donaldtrump.scotland
19

Lillig,

13/06/2008 10:58:03
The Scots once again show that the old "shoot yourself in the foot" trick is the best way to avoid any chance of gaining something.

God forbid that we should succeed. Much better to sit around whingeing about how bad our lot is - rather than do something about it.

What Donald Trump wants to do in Aberdeen could be used to good advantage to promote the area and attract more tourism and more business into the area. The task of the council there is to make sure that as much as possible of the money swilling around there, after it opens, is kept in the area and is used to develop the area. This includes making sure that conservation issues are served properly and thoroughly.

If Scotland is to seek we have to be braver than the bunch of weak minded moaners who are afraid of change, and afraid of the challenges encountered in ensuring that the change is done in the right way for the area.

Let Donald in - and make sure that the contract is a good one - and lets move on.
20

Lillig,

13/06/2008 11:00:16
Oh God, a stupid mistake.

If Scotland is to SUCCEED etc etc
21

Annoyingboi,

Edinburgh 13/06/2008 13:25:08
Bring it to East Lothian instead, nobody is interested in travelling way up to the north anyway, nothing there but the wilds
22

Jock Wilson,

13/06/2008 14:28:05
Annoyinboi,

We had three universities up here at a time when you lot were crapping in the closes.

23

Neil,

Glasgow 13/06/2008 14:56:33
"Cllr Storr is wasting her time. And everyone else's."

Exactly the point. As Miio boasted yesterday these parasites get off on wasting people's time & hope if the do enough the rest of us will let them get their way for an easier life. They have already held this investment up for 3 years. We should simply not let these eco-fascists have any power over us.

Beth #9 since you are unable to understand the differnce between paying out £1 billion & being paid it could you loan me a couple of hundred. I promise I will let you pay it back next week.
24

Buttress,

13/06/2008 16:16:29
23 I think Godwin's Law has really come into play now... in fact Neil I think it did yesterday, but so many of your ramblings have been removed it's possibly hard for the passing reader to see.

Personally, I think those of us who don't want to see this development should not be dictated to by the likes of Neil.



25

,

13/06/2008 18:39:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
26

Buttress,

13/06/2008 19:29:00
Eh? Neil 25 - look at yesterday - so many of your posts removed!

However, I did copy them to WORD and even repost some on another website so we could laugh...

How many websites do you post the same old stuff on? Alongisde so many others? Same old hackneyed stuff...

I wondered how long before the d-word would be brought into play!
27

ScotLJM,

Michigan,USA 13/06/2008 19:29:37
#13 Richard Taylor....with all this bantering back and forth, you are giving this ex-Aberdonian/Yank gal a great laugh with your witty remarks! Keep it up!
28

Buttress,

13/06/2008 19:34:48
Oh Neil - sad too that the post which made me post this yesterday:


'Neil 152 - you are one of the most seriously disturbed individuals I have come across on a website in a very long time.

I think that the police now need to investigate your allegations, which are becoming deranged.

I am sure that the website owners will be able to supply contact details.

I suggest you look up the laws regarding posting on the internet, and libel.'

has been removed from the site, but I have a copy...


29

Richard Taylor,

Aberdeen 13/06/2008 19:43:46
#27 ScotLJM

Gee, I'm embarrassed now! ;-)

Well, you can't take yourself too seriously! Besides, not me, nor anyone else can, at the end of it all, influence the enquiry.

I hope for the development, others don't - c'est la vie! But the banter is funny! :-)

What's an Aberdonian quine doing in Michigan?
30

Blue Tooner,

Aberdeenshire 13/06/2008 20:21:27
#18 Buttress. Thanks for that link. I would recommend all concerned read the article. Agree or disagree, it’s a refreshing change from the schmoozie, crawly Uriah Heep stuff we get from the papers here in Aberdeenshire.
“Oh wad some power the giftie gie us
To see oursel's as others see us!
It wad frae monie a blunder free us,
And foolish notion”
Amen to that Robbie!
31

Myosotis,

13/06/2008 20:34:11
There`s been a lot of loose talk about fascists on this board from two or three sad people.

It`s not a term I would want to employ even about opponents, but I was tempted when I read that the fishing crofter who has been crossing Trump`s site to reach the sea for the past 30 years has now been stopped by a padlock.

The coastguards, too, can no longer get that way for a rescue.
32

Jock Wilson,

13/06/2008 20:37:45
30,

While you are in need of refreshment, Blue Tooner, try this one as well:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/magnus_linklater/article4106593.ece
33

Jock Wilson,

13/06/2008 20:39:53
31,

Resist the temptation, Myosotis, that does not even come close to fascism. You would be doing violence to the English language.
34

Buttress,

13/06/2008 21:03:11
Shame that Linklater is so ignorant about a great deal re this. His stuff about dunes is remarkable for its wrong headedness.

But he used to edit The Scotsman.

Re 'fascists' - it's the same rants which some go from board to board posting - try the climate change boards! Woooo! Bet Neil posts on those...




35

Blue Tooner,

Aberdeenshire 13/06/2008 22:41:34
My personal feeling is that allowing any developer to knowingly destroy even a small part of an SSSI in this day and age will fuel global contempt for N E Scotland, and I really don't want that to happen.
36

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 13/06/2008 22:42:29
11 Overton

William Walton.

Senior lecturer in town planning at Aberdeen University.
Chairman of Road Sense against the AWPR
Eminent objector against Trump

Presumably Martin's demo friend.


Do all these people get paid by their public and private institutions, to appear at the PLI as individual objectors?? Does anyone know?
37

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 13/06/2008 22:46:17
35 Blue Tooner

On the contrary, my personal feeling is that anyone turned away from investing this kind of time and money in this part of the world, will fuel future economic regression for Scotland. I really don't want THAT to happen.
38

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 13/06/2008 22:49:13
34 Buttress

You've said that three times about Linklater now. Keep saying it and you might eventually believe it. On the other hand, cry wolf too loudly and we'll know that you don't really believe it.
39

Jock Wilson,

13/06/2008 22:55:56
Bluetooner,

Imagine if you will that the economy of your part of the country had gone down the tubes. Social deprivation: increasing depopulation etc. On an SSSI in the area, oil was found.

What would you do? I don't think you really need to answer.
40

ScotLJM,

MI, USA 13/06/2008 23:19:06
#29 Richard Taylor, Well, I still like your humour to this very serious Trump development that is about to start WWW111 between the nays and yeas. What am I doing in America?, well, as an architect there was not much prospects in aberdeen. so I emigrated. Had cousins here so that helped. Needless to say, I am all for the Trump Resort.
41

Jock Wilson,

13/06/2008 23:32:18
ScotLJM

Sorry to intrude. As an architect what are your views on the current state of Aberdeen? Those of us who can remember a more elegant era, now despair at what has happened to Union Street, Braod Street and the Gallowgate, just to mention a few examples of municipal vandalism.
42

Blue Tooner,

Aberdeenshire 13/06/2008 23:35:20
#39, Sorry Jock, but I don't understand how what you're saying here relates to golf and big, posh houses. When the oil runs out how are all these rich tourists going to get to Aberdeen? I think we really have to look at the big picture. You only have to look at St Fergus Gas, Peterhead Power Station and Cruden Bay Oil plant to know that we can do BIG BIG business here. It's just a case of what will work and what won't. And that's a matter of opinion.
43

Jock Wilson,

13/06/2008 23:42:03
What I was driving at, Bluetooner, was your posturing on the subject of SSSIs. Of course they are valuable and recognised as such. But my point is that they are not sacrosanct. They cannot be, under certain circumstances.

SSSIs do not self select. They are designated by the SNH, often controversially.
44

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 13/06/2008 23:57:57
43 Jock

Worse still, SSSIs are not even designated by SNH. They are designated by the UK-wide Joint Nature Conservation Committee. SNH sits on this committee along it's English counterpart as well as many professors and environmentalists.

In 2004, one-eighth of Scotland had been designated as SSSI. Since then, even more land has been designated, and not just SSSI. SPA (Special Protection Area) as well.

Building on SSSI is not sacrosanct as you say, but it is becoming increasingly difficult, especially when organisations such as RSPB cite 'the dunes' and not 'birds' as there main concern at Menie.

It has become one big environmental bandwagon.
45

Blue Tooner,

Aberdeenshire 14/06/2008 00:07:48
#43 Posturing on the subject of SSSIs? No, I'm not posturing on anything. I have nothing to gain or lose here, it's just my opinion.
46

ScotLJM,

MI,USA 14/06/2008 00:49:22
#41 Jock, no you are not intruding at all, it is good to chat, well, I've been in America many years, and my last visit To Aberdeen was ten years ago, so nothing recent. I was disappointed that it cost so much for everything and not as safe. Too many drunk young guys.. sorry to say I nerver regretted emmigrating.
47

ScotLJM,

14/06/2008 01:10:39
Jock, I want to add that from an architectural standpoint, as of ten years ago, that nothing significant that had been done, at least in the city, they had added two shopping malls, but they were disappointing, I worked in regional mall development, among other thing here in the US. This Trump resort will be like nothing Aberdeen has ever seen, and I think scares the 'Shire councillors.
48

overton,

balmedie 14/06/2008 07:08:50
36 Andrew BOD,

Thanks Andrew.

So we're paying Walton's wages as well?

What's the story with these guys - no AWPR, no development, us all on bicycles, no cars etc etc

49

,

14/06/2008 07:12:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
50

Buttress,

14/06/2008 07:57:07
How about some reasoned debate Overton 49? Instead of the silly refs to 'fascists' etc? Alongside Neil - whose post claiming I was lying about him having pots removed I see has been removed, along with so many others of his...


Andrew - no matter how many or how few times I say it it will still be true - Linklater used to edit the Scotsman.

51

Buttress,

14/06/2008 07:58:43
47 - yup, and A+DS, who feel the architecture is pretty grim, and that is a worry.

52

Buttress,

14/06/2008 08:33:20
Anyhow - just how many golf courses are needed?

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/latestnews/Access-for-local-golfers-a.4185714.jp
53

Buttress,

14/06/2008 09:44:45
Well, not all want this locally though either, do they?

Look at the comments under Simon Jenkins' article yesterday.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/13/donaldtrump.scotland

Don't you think that the precess of public inquiry is a fair one?

(I wait for another rant likening me to an eco-fascist etc etc...)

54

Liberal for life,

Dunblane 14/06/2008 10:06:45
I'm glad Anne Robertson has been giving the opportunity to express the majority LibDem view in this whole sorry affair. The local party's good name has been besmirched by the actions of a few political activists who should pursue their individual agendas elsewhere if they can't behave in the party's best interests in future, and I for one am watching with interest in how they do continue to mis-behave.
55

Buttress,

14/06/2008 10:14:13
However, many beyond the locality think this a very bad idea indeed - Trump gold has obviously dazzled the eyes of some, but not all.

I can't see it as a 'sorry affair' in the sense I think it raises some interesting issues which need to be explored at an inquiry.




56

Jock Wilson,

14/06/2008 10:33:16
47,

Thanks for your reply. There are more drunk guys (and gals now also) and the two shopping malls are still there.

However, the local plan is very ambitious and you should have a look at it when you have the time. There is a huge development going on in the vicinity of the railway station (an eyesore) and there is much talk of pedestrianising parts of Union Street.

However, over the last 50 years Aberdeen's architectural heritage has been treated carelessly. Have a look at Diane Morgan's book, 'Lost Aberdeen' and you will grasp the full scale of the tragedy.

Ding it doon should be the town's motto. I don't know what that would be in Latin but perhaps Aberdeenum Delendum Est would suffice.
57

Buttress,

14/06/2008 10:34:34
Or pave Paradise, put up a parking lot?

(Or indeed a Trump development...)
58

Jock Wilson,

14/06/2008 10:35:54
Futtress (female ferret in Doric)

If you are in the business of having other people's posts removed from this site, who really is the fascist?
59

Richard Taylor,

Aberdeen 14/06/2008 10:42:13
ScotLJM: I would agree have to say the city is not what it was, but I suppose it's the same everywhere.

Demolish the monstrous carbuncles (who said that?!) that are St Nicholas House, St Nicholas & Bon-Accord shopping Ctres that have cut off George St, previously a main artery & bring the street back.

Clean up the granite buildings to sparkle again, they have lost their lustre - especially Union St is looking rather tatty these days.

Roses back on the carriageways (I recall Anderson Drive in its splendour)...nowadays with cheap tendering out, it's simply not done.

All said, everywhere these days has its faults, but these are magnified & more easily seen if you've lived there a time.

Drink & drugs are a growing scourge...but not just here. Sadly.

Sorry for thread creep.

ps. As for Jenkins, another who will have never set foot at Menie, but thinks he knows what's best.


60

Jock Wilson,

14/06/2008 10:49:16
Richard,

I agree with all you have written but not about Jenkins. He is a top journalist with a great knowledge of architecture and landscapes.

However, his weakness is an obsession with the theme of local government versus centralised government and this really is how he interprets the Trump issue. He is a real campaigner for localism, hence his swipe at Salmond.

He has overlooked however the fact that Aberdeenshire Council en masse voted for the Trump plan, so the battle lines are not as distinct as Jenkins believes.
61

overton,

balmedie 14/06/2008 11:01:24
55 Liberal for life,Dunblane

Thank you - there is perhaps some hope for your party then.

The inexplicable behaviour of Ford, Storr, Johnstone and Ross at the Inquiry and Stephen at the back end of last year will certainly make an appreciation of your parties goals rather difficult up here though.
62

Buttress,

14/06/2008 11:03:04
Jenkins is a very astute journalist - and knows exactly what he is writing and why. His last major swipe at Salmond I recall well... it seemed to have an effect...

Jock - who removes the posts? Not me. Interesting that they are removed though. Maybe those who edit this consider the repetition of so much drivel from Neil, Overton et al is dragging down the tone of this even further?

The Guardian seems to have sensible discussion without resorting to the sort of silly abuse which some here seem to feel is he way to win hearts and minds to their supposed cause.


Why not stop the abuse and learn to debate issues like a grown up?

I wait another rant - use of the words parasite, eco-fascists, deniers, Hitler, and more schholboy merry japes of that sort.

If this is the standard of intellect of those who support the Trump plans, then I see why they have fallen for them.









63

Buttress,

14/06/2008 11:04:17
Have you attended each day of the inquiry then Overton?

64

overton,

balmedie 14/06/2008 11:06:00
50 Buttrface:

Who are you like? The Eco-Gestapo of the bloggs?

Unfortunately you have not come back with any sense at all lately (perhaps you need to get out and get some fresh air) and quoting the Guardian is not something that can be regarded as meaningful.
65

Buttress,

14/06/2008 11:07:44
Again - peurile response.

Have you attended the inquiry each day?
66

overton,

balmedie 14/06/2008 11:09:57
66 Buttface

I suppose you have 'way and means of making me talk'?
67

Buttress,

14/06/2008 11:11:04
I gather that's a NO then.
68

overton,

balmedie 14/06/2008 11:12:58

Looks like the Ramblers have left the Inquiry as it appears they do not now have a case for objecting.
69

overton,

balmedie 14/06/2008 11:14:56
68 Buttress,

Your assuptions are again, and as always, flawed.

I refuse to break at this early stage of the questioning.
70

Buttress,

14/06/2008 11:20:26
My asuptions?

71

Buttress,

14/06/2008 11:22:36
Or even my assuptions?

In what manner flawed?

72

overton,

balmedie 14/06/2008 11:33:34
72 Buttbrain,

Well, that's you corrected one of your mistakes - how's about correcting all the rest while you're at it.
An apology to all my fellow bloggers for your self-rightious, high handed and arrogant statements would be appreciated as well.
73

Buttress,

14/06/2008 11:47:20
Your fellow bloggers?

Please point me in the direction of their blogs?

74

overton,

balmedie 14/06/2008 12:19:16
74 Buttstorrfordbrain,

Go shopping, walk the dog, go to the pictures, anything ............ pleeeeeease.
75

overton,

balmedie 14/06/2008 12:25:44
74 Sturmbannfuhrer Buttclown von Eco-Freak,

Would that be bloggees then perhaps?
76

Buttress,

14/06/2008 12:25:49
Censorship then?

Do tell us about the inquiry. I think many wait with interest to read your first hand account.

77

overton,

balmedie 14/06/2008 12:37:35
77 Beatrice,

You don't really care so stop pretending.
Who are these many are they bloggees or bloggers - do you know them?
Did you mean Menie?

78

JR Ewing,

Aberdeen 14/06/2008 12:39:28
Ford and Storr have no credibility
He was all for destroying an SSSI at Clashindarroch by approving the building of a road through the middle of it to further his wind turbine agenda. Fortunately Moray Council put a large spanner in the works.

Simon Jenkins has he ever set foot in Scotland never mind Aberdeenshire

His virtuous "smallholding" has more in common with a landfill site than a farm
79

,

14/06/2008 12:43:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
80

Buttress,

14/06/2008 12:58:36
It's a pity that this online debate has been reduced to the type of peurile posting as displayed by Overton, Neil and to a lesser degree several others.

However, it's useful to see the low level of credibility of a great deal of the supposed support. I presume that Overton, despite the commentary regarding the inquiry, has not been anywhere near it. Indeed, Overton, I suspect, was at school at the time.

The intelligent posters on this on-line forum, and the ones with a wider vocabulary than Overton displays, have shown a remarkable grasp of the subject matter.

Storr, Ford etc are not alone in their opposition to this scheme. The eyes of many beyond the locality are looking to see if Scotland can be bought and sold by the likes of Trump, with this real estate development of low quality architecture. It's a small country ripe for exploitation by the astute.

As far as Simon Jenkins is concerned -

here's his email, why not ask him?

simon.jenkins@guardian.co.uk


He's generally regarded as one of the foremost journalists and commentators of our era, a former Times editor, and major columnist in a number of national papers.




81

overton,

balmedie 14/06/2008 13:25:06
81 Buttress,

Your problem is you write a lot and say nothing.
Your friends at the enquiry act in a similar fashion and their filibustering makes their weak arguments all the more frustrating and cost the taxpayer even more money.

No arguments, worth any merit, have been presented by any of the objectors.

William Walton's involvement in this Inquiry and that of the AWPR is entirely suspect.

There is clearly very little real case for saving the small part of the SSSI and the economic case that has been presented so far is entirely above board and strong.

Your denial of the true credentials of Martin Ford is quite disturbing and the fact that he and his side kick Storr went into the ISC meeting with an already pre-defined anti-development strategy is something that requires further discussion within Aberdeenshire Council.

Because of the stupidity of councillors like Marcus Humphrey, Ford could not believe his luck when he ended up with the decisive vote - which he used in an entirely underhand way against the wishes of the Formartine Committee and those of Aberdeenshire Council and the electorate.

Menie is a piece of real estate that you and your pals never knew about until Mr Trump bought it and proposed a major development upon it.

Your objections are false and are based upon predjudice and not about the environment so don't sit there on your high horse trying to lecture people on what is debatable and what is right because the basis of anything you say is dishonest.

Now go shopping.
82

JR Ewing,

Aberdeen 14/06/2008 13:30:33
Buttress

Clashindarroch - fact or fiction ?

Smallholding - a rubbish tip fact or fiction ?


From Jenkins article

"Menie estate covering the Forevan sand dunes" - grossly inaccurate

83

Buttress,

14/06/2008 13:42:19
Overton - I allow you to show how ignorant you are. It's not hard.

I have no friends at the inquiry.

You mistake a great deal, and have shown it.

84

Buttress,

14/06/2008 21:58:24
I rest my case! Let's hope yours is rather more high calibre than the posts on here by you and your compatriots.
85

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 14/06/2008 23:36:29
Buttress

Please don't attempt to take the high ground in intellectual debate. Your posts are numerous but say very little. Yes, you put forward arguments, but they are shallow or at least are not backed up by much reasoning. Links to newspaper articles are very admirable but do not form part of the discussion on this thread. They are in essence subjective and could be taken out of context by objectors and supporters quite easily. (And have been!)

You have been asked on a number of occasions about why the RSPB are objecting on the grounds of the dunes and not the birds, and have failed to comment. And more recently, you've been invited to discuss the proposed destruction of the Clashindarroch SSSI, as approved by the ISC chaired by Ford. These are reasonable requests, and while I don't expect you to know the detail behind these actions, you must have an opinion.

Please discuss...
86

Buttress,

15/06/2008 03:49:11
Oh dear Andrew - I simply don't think it's worth it. Interesting to see how easily lead up the garden path some of you are though, and how little you actually have to say on this.

87

overton,

balmedie 15/06/2008 06:41:33

Has anyone actually seen Martin Ford arrive at the Inquiry on his bicycle?

I know he has his little silver crash helmet that he holds when prompted for photographs by his 'egg on legs' publicist but does he really cycle in?

Apparently he was seen being driven off from the Exhibition Centre on Friday, one hour after the end of the Inquiry, by one of his fellow Lib Dem objectors, in a huge gas guzzling four by four.

This kind of hypocritical behaviour does not help a weak case that has been even more weakened during the last week due the pathetic performance of his team of self-publicising sycophants.
88

Buttress,

15/06/2008 08:51:35
Yawn.
89

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 15/06/2008 10:08:24
88 Buttress

Confirming my suspicions entirely.

I refer you back to post 50 when you said: "How about some reasoned debate Overton 49?"

Where is yours? Look back at your 30 or so posts and you'll see your comments are about the posters on this thread as opposed to reasoned debate on the proposed development?

And you STILL won't discuss Clashindarroch SSSI or the RSPB. Those things are very pertinent to the debate, and are nowhere near the "garden path". It seems you JUST DON'T KNOW.
90

Buttress,

15/06/2008 10:40:46
Oh but I just don't care any longer, and it isn't going to be reasoned debate - is it? Merely an excuse for more silly postings and allegations from - well, is this simply trolling, do you actually care, or is this part of the Trump publicity machine?

I'll continue to read the news reports, a wide variety of them, and it will be interesting to see how the press deal with the ongoing evidence giving.

Have you actually been at the inquiry? Mostly they are long and dull with complex legal points being investigated, and newspapers tend to try to make something sensational out of untold hours of legal information and calm questioning, as though it was some TV courtroom drama. The attempts to demonise people is quite interesting too.

My interest is wider than simply this one inquiry.

Re the RSPB - why don't you ask them?

'This is one of the very best examples of a mobile dune system in the country and SSSI designation should offer such a site a very high level of protection. There are also other habitats, bird populations and further biodiversity interests which are threatened by this development.

RSPB Scotland has tried unsuccessfully, at meetings and by letter, to persuade the developer to modify his proposals so as to avoid damage to the SSSI. Along with other conservation organisations we have objected to Aberdeenshire Council, making it clear that we do not object to the principle of golf, or other development, at this location but that this must not be at the cost of the destruction of the SSSI.

Consenting this application would not only be contrary to development plan policies protecting important sites for wildlife, but also to policies on housing, development on the coast and others.'


RSPB:

About the RSPB
The RSPB speaks out for birds and wildlife, tackling the problems that threaten our environment. We rely upon memberships and donations to fund our work.

So - it's up to the membership really - if people consider they don't l
91

Buttress,

15/06/2008 10:41:41
So - it's up to the membership really - if people consider they don't like what the RSPB is doing, that's a choice they can make - cease to support.

Now - I think you are so predictable I think I can guess what your response to that will be - so go, surprise me.







92

Buttress,

15/06/2008 11:00:59
You might enjoy, too, the RSPB Inquiry Blog:

http://blogs.rspb.org.uk/trumpinquiry/default.aspx



93

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 15/06/2008 11:21:20
Buttress - WOW

Thank you for some reasoned opinion. I may not agree with you but I applaud your efforts.

On Clashindarroch, I wanted your opinion on the fact that development on an SSSI is not sacrosanct. Precedents have been set and if the Trump development is in the national interest it may be worth building half of a golf course on 10% of SSSI. (30% if you include the boundary line but only one third of that will be developed.)

On the RSPB, I went to the Scotsman debate in Aberdeen Townhouse on the 'Economy & Environment'. Anne McCall of RSPB stated publicly at that meeting that the main issue on the Trump development was the dunes, not the birds. My question is, why is a bird organisation objecting then? And not only that, but also spending a heck of a lot of money on an alternative course layout. Surely the RSPB's resource would be better employed protecting real bird sanctuaries at risk and not jumping on a high profile bandwagon.

I am an ordinary citizen who has lived not far from Menie all my life, and have no association with the Trump organisation. Unlike certain objectors, I have to attend my place of work to earn money and so have been unable to get to the PLI. I've had to rely on the Scotsman, the Herald, and yes, the P&J for daily reports.
94

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 15/06/2008 11:24:33
Buttress

Thanks for the link, but I've already been there. And to Sustainable Aberdeenshire's site, and to SEPA, and to SNH, etc... Unlike some folks, I've considered all views and most of the evidence before taking my stance.
95

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 15/06/2008 11:57:27
92 Buttress

I've just noticed your comment about your interest being much wider than this inquiry. Please divulge what you mean.
96

Buttress,

15/06/2008 12:06:34

I think if you look closely at the remit of the RSPB it covers wildlife too. In fact its tag line here:

http://www.rspb.org.uk/ourwork/conservation/sites/scotland/menie.asp

is 'protecting wildlife sites'. It's not just about birds - and as a membership organisation, it campaigns on behalf of wildlife. It is perfectly entitled to object and to attend the inquiry. You could have done also - you could have submitted your views, your written evidence, vast amounts of paperwork required for an inquiry, and you could have turned up and been cross examined (not something to be undertaken lightly - despite the fact some here are making out that it's all amateurs and Mr Ford it's not - there will be some highly skilled legal people getting the real meat out of those giving evidence) and you could additionally have indicated your wish to cross examine - but again, unless you know what you are doing, it's not something to undertake lightly.


I do recommend you read the blog - it's about my experience of public inquiries too, seems quite level headed, and not the sensationalist stuff we read in the press, or, indeed, from some who have posted here. Remember too no evidence has as yet been heard from those against the development - the developer nad his people go first.

No, development on an SSSI is not sacrosanct, it's the same as demolition of a listed building - some people think those are totally protected, but they are not. The protection is slightly different in Scotland to what it is in England, but basically there has to be a pretty good case in order to do so. Usually the benefit though is something like public infrastructure, not a private development. So a windfarm, a transport development, something of that type can be claimed as for the greater public good. Where economic benefit is claimed that's a bit grey.

Of course developers claim, and at times they work hand in glove with local authorities - at times in secret deals, which come to light
97

Buttress,

15/06/2008 12:08:19


when papers fall off the back of photocopiers - that their development will bring jobs and great economic benefits. Therefore they claim are in line with public policy. The jobs claims tend to be wild and and guesstimates, and they additionally tend not, after the development, ever get to be checked up on by anyone.

I'm a cynic, seen it all before...

I have no idea how some people are attending, but presumably they have leave of absence from their place of work, unpaid, or are taking holiday entitlement to do so.

Others of course will be there in their line of work, as with the RSPB Planner(see blog).

With regard to the RSPB alternative course - I have no idea how much has been spent on this - at times private benefactors pay for this as a donation or the person concerned gives his or her time and expertise for nothing, because it's cause they believe in... however, at an inquiry it's usual for the opposition to have an alternative viable plan, it's no use simply objecting, you have to be constructive too. You also should, both sides, be willing to reach a compromise - seems Trump is unwilling, it's all or nothing.

My view is that there could be a course (although how many golf courses does the area need?) without building on the most sensitive area, but in reality I do think that this is a real estate development (against public policy) and the golf course an excuse to build. I'm not buying in to the Mr Trump's mother was Scottish etc approach - hogwash, in my view.

I suspect if this goes ahead it won't be the salvation for the area claimed, and it will be something akin to Disneyland - mock Scottish Baronial. Timeshares - and a heap of service jobs. Not sure where those people will live, but there you go.

I additionally wonder what on earth, apart from the golf, people will do when they get there - do you feel there is enough in the area to attract the wives and families of those playing golf (it's usually men...)?

So this is about
98

Buttress,

15/06/2008 12:09:07
Cont

So this is about more than just a golf course - it's about how far protected land and national policies can be bent in favour of a private developer, who seems unwilling to compromise, which is foolish in my view, and if the claims of wider public benefit outweigh other issues. It's a bit of a test really of public policy v private gain, or is th