Sir, Alistair Carmichael does himself a great disservice in his attempts to score political points with attacks on the V&A project.
The V&A is, of course, not Scottish Government-led it was first brought to the Scottish Government in 2008 by the five project partners Dundee City Council, Dundee and Abertay Universities, V&A and Scottish Enterprise.
The Scottish Government, like the Heritage Lottery Fund, is a supportive funder of the project rather than partner. The economic benefits of the project are significant, supporting hundreds of jobs both during and after its construction, and when completed it will bring an estimated £11.6 million a year boost to the economy.
The Scottish Government has long been a strong supporter of the V&A Dundee, committing £15 million in the early days of the project towards the construction project and providing revenue funding to help support staffing, marketing and fundraising, and the development of the exhibitions. By contrast, the UK Government has provided only a very small amount of financial support and the Heritage Lottery Fund is of course legally independent of the UK Government.
In April 2014 the Scottish Government was informed, within the bounds of commercial confidentiality, that the initial estimate for the V&A Dundee project would not be met, but that the council was entering negotiation on a fixed price contract. These negotiations took several months. Disclosure of information during those sensitive negotiations would have prejudiced substantially the ability of Dundee City Council to get the best possible deal for the city.
The Scottish Government was informed of the revised £80.11m contract cost on 18 December 18 and notified that the council, as the body accountable for the project, intended to make the revised cost public at the council’s policy and resources committee meeting on January 26.
Dundee City Council has since announced that it will launch a full, independent “lessons learned” review of the project led by John McLelland, which is welcome. Throughout the project we have been as transparent as possible and the agreed fixed price construction contract will help ensure the project remains on track.
Our additional support of a further £10m announced on January 19 with the prospect of a further £12m still being discussed is a sign of our continued commitment to the project. Not for the first time, Mr Carmichael has blundered in his attempts to grab headlines on issues on which he is clearly woefully misinformed.
Fiona Hyslop. Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh.
Maintenance cost worry
Sir, In addition to the spiralling cost of the V&A museum building, has any consideration been given to the maintenance and cleaning of the building?With its irregular shape and overhang jutting well into the Tay, it will require specialists to maintain and clean the building. Presumably such specialists will not be cheap.
Colin Topping. 26 Crathes Court, Glenrothes.
We should hail iconic building
Sir, With regard to recent publicity surrounding the V&A; Jim Crumley’s article last Tuesday pretty much said it all regarding the importance of this iconic build project. This is not just a Dundee project it is one of national importance for Scotland. There is also the matter of Dundee now recognised as being a UNESCO designated City of Design. Instead of knocking this project it is about time everyone got fully behind it.
Initial costings, I must admit, were ambitious to say the least for such a stunning design, but let us look a little further afield to the west, in particular the new Transport Museum in Glasgow, another stunning piece of architecture designed by Zaha Hadid.
That project was initially costed at £50m, but finally cost £74m to complete. It never had anything like the amount of scorn poured on it as this project has had. Glasgow city council leader Gordon Matheson hailed Zaha Hadid’s “masterpiece” design. This is an attitude we should be adopting.
The V&A Dundee will bring people in from around the world as well as the UK to view this iconic building and its contents. Then there are the job opportunities . . . people will be needed to look after all the visitors. It will not be a one-year wonder, this will go on for generations.
Stewart Dodd. Harefield Avenue, Dundee.
Respecting their rights
Sir, Are the officers in charge of Police Scotland, “immune to political control”? Are they, indeed, “above the law”? The latest “stop and search of children” figures released, makes one wonder. If someone under the age of 16 is in a police station for questioning, they have the right to speak to a solicitor in private before questioning and to have a parent or responsible adult present during the interview.
If it is deemed that the child is unable to comprehend what is happening to them, then the interview cannot take place at that time. When children, some as young as five, are stopped and searched in Scotland’s housing schemes and on its meaner streets how can they possibly be expected to understand, far less exercise their rights under the law?
Those in charge of Scotland’s police have “previous” when it comes to trampling on or ignoring children’s rights. It seems that Police Scotland after giving a promise to Scottish MSPs in our own parliament in Edinburgh to cease the practice of stop and search of children under 11, then proceeded to give the proverbial “two fingers” to those MSPs by carrying on with the practice regardless.
Joseph A Peterson. St Andrews.
It should heed its own advisers
Sir, Few people dispute the necessity of first reducing our energy use and then substituting the use of fossil fuels with renewable energy alternatives, to help address the challenge of climate change.
However, as we have seen, there is public disquiet about proliferation of energy developments in Scotland’s wild land areas. It is vital that any decisions on the location of these developments rely on the fair and impartial assessment of all pertinent information and points of view.
The people of Scotland depend on their government to ensure this happens. Unfortunately, we do not believe the Scottish Government is doing this in a consistent manner with windfarm developments.
In the face of evidence and objections from many different organisations, communities and individuals, the Scottish Government has approved proposals to site colossal wind farms inland, at Stronelairg in the Monadhliath Mountains, and offshore, straddling the Firths of the Forth and Tay.
In both cases the Scottish Government chose to ignore the views of its own expert advisers from Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH). Their advice made it absolutely clear that the impact from these turbines will be very significant, and that the locations were problematic as a result. It seems iniquitous to us that, having put in place a planning system which invites the expert views of statutory consultees, the Scottish Government too frequently ignores them if they prove inconvenient. At the very least, evidence of this calibre from SNH should trigger public inquiries.
We therefore call on the Scottish Government to commit to taking cognisance of its own advisers. Rather than force objectors to challenge these decisions in the courts at great expense, the Scottish Government should first ensure they have been exposed to the proper and democratic scrutiny that their scale and potential impact warrants.
John Mayhew. Director, Association forthe Protection of RuralScotland. Brian Linington. President, Mountaineering Council of Scotland. Peter Willimott. President, the Munro Society. Sir Kenneth Calman. Chairman, the National Trust for Scotland. David Thomson. Convener, Ramblers Scotland John Milne. Co-ordinator, Scottish Wild Land Group.
Watch for frogs
Sir, Every year at spawning time hundreds of frogs are killed on the road going out of Auchterhouse heading east. Could Auchterhouse people perhaps look out for these little creatures and give them a chance?
A Gillespie. Auchterhouse.