Kenneth Roy

The expert view is wrong.
These deaths could
have been prevented

Bob Cant

What does
'Tutti Frutti'
say to us now?


6

John Cameron

The great 'Chariots
of Fire' was the
purest hokum
4

7

Andrew Hook

Down with
everything: the new
American mantra
5

7

Ronnie Smith

Tanned and smiling,
Mr Blair arrives
among us
5

7

Islay McLeod

Villages of
Scotland:
(3) Thornhill
5

10.08.11
No. 436

Graham Lironi

Wow! Laughable, naïve, warped (I could go on ad nauseum but you get the idea) – just some of the adjectives that spring to mind on reading Anthony Seaton's rant (4 August) – prompted by what exactly remains a mystery – against public relations.
     Perhaps, as an emeritus professor in the school of medicine and dentistry, he should think twice before opening his mouth on a subject he so clearly knows nothing about. Lack of knowledge does not, of course, forfeit his right to express his opinion – but what misguided nonsense his chooses to spew forth – and apropos of what exactly?
     He will, I’m sure, discount any rebuttal to his views from myself, given that I am an owner of a PR company, but, perhaps strangely, I do somehow manage to sleep soundly at night, despite the nutty professor’s assertion that I, and others of my ilk, have reached a moral nadir.
     So public relations is 'central to all the corrupting inter-relations of politics, the media, the police and multinational corporations'? Seriously? I do not question the extent of the corruption corroding our establishment – from our financial institutions, our religious institutions, our politicians and (dare I suggest it) our academic institutions – but to lay the blame at the door of public relations is to give us a credit and an influence far beyond our wildest dreams and is quite frankly bizarre.
     I do not propose to seek to defend what some of us prefer to refer to as a 'profession' (the use of the professor's term 'trade' rankles a little, but I’m a sensitive type) for what would be the point? In my experience there is little to be gained in debating with someone about a subject he knows nothing about.
     I confess to having no idea what he's getting at when he asserts that public relations 'sees policemen, politicians and journalists moving easily from one organisation to another under its banner' and while I would accept that it 'earns its fees by its ability to present and enhance one side of the story', I could never accept that it 'obscures the other'.
     I could go on but will finish by noting that, contrary to the professor's skewed assertion that 'public relations practitioners stand between the public and those who should communicate openly with us', in fact I view my role (as do my clients) as being to facilitate the open communication between my clients and their publics, whoever those publics might be.
     Finally, Professor Seaton appears to have an obsession with the 'considerable' fees charged by public relations professionals. If only it were so.



The Donald is trumped.

How will Scotland

keep him sweet now?


Douglas Marr


'Trouble at windmills, Mr Trump!' That may not have been their exact words, but there is little doubt that The Donald's minions and collaborators in the north east will have made urgent calls to Manhattan to let the clan chief know of the latest threat to the 'greatest golf course in the world'.
     The cause of their panic is the planning application for 11 offshore wind turbines submitted by the European Offshore Wind Deployment Centre (EOWDC). The proposed turbines would be situated less than two miles off the Aberdeenshire coast, slightly south of Mr Trump's course but clearly visible when the prevailing North Sea haar relents.
      The Trump organisation's response was as rapid as it was predictable. For connoisseurs of irony the organisation’s statement was a collector's item. 'We are not going to support a project that compromises what we have done. We will use any available legal means in any jurisdiction.' The spokesman also warned or perhaps threatened, 'I don't think it's a good idea to interfere with our investment'. Apparently the organisation objects on the grounds that the proposed turbines would spoil the views from its course and associated hotel and housing developments.
     The delicious irony lies in the fact that the Trump organisation has ridden roughshod over local objections to the destruction of a unique natural environment. Additionally, the construction of the exclusive course, with its high profile and high security, has already effectively prevented access to a resource enjoyed for generations by locals and visitors alike. A further layer of irony has been added by the threat of litigation. Ironic because this is an organisation that has consistently pilloried local objectors attempting to use the law to protect their rights and their homes. One elderly objector is still facing the very real prospect of bankruptcy because of the costs involved in trying to fight Mr Trump and Aberdeenshire Council in the courts. Mr Trump, in his usual considered and reasonable manner, described another objector as 'the village idiot'.
     The planning application has implications that extend far beyond Trump Towers. The more perceptive members of the Scottish Government and Aberdeenshire Council will realise that they are very rapidly being painted into a corner. Their deeply flawed rationale for supporting the course has always been the employment opportunities arising from the construction and subsequent flood of millionaire golfers. As is becoming increasingly apparent, the economic case was always reliant on mirrors.
     Little local employment has been generated, although local primary school children were conscripted to plant marram grass on the dunes from which they soon will be excluded. The contract for earthworks was awarded to a company based in County Cork more or less at the same time as a local contractor and major employer went out of business. Privately, other local construction and plant hire companies are expressing disappointment about the absence of any trickle-down benefits.

 

Local and national politicians have been unwise, to say the least, in getting too close to Mr Trump and his plans. Very shortly they will find themselves between a rock and a hard place.


     The prospect of employment arising from the construction of the hotel and housing developments is also receding. As recently as June of this year Mr Trump recognised that even he is not immune from the world economic downturn. When asked about the hotel and housing development he answered rhetorically, 'Where is the market?'. With no improvement imminent, it is unlikely that Trumpton will be built any time soon.
     The economic and employment case was always a fig leaf for local and national politicians anxious to have their place in the sun with Mr Trump. And no, that is not another veiled reference to the first minister's predilection for association with media tycoons. Without denigrating the service sector, the jobs arising from the Trump development would be unlikely to create a vibrant and progressive Scotland. As far back as June 2008, I wrote an early critique of the Trump development that asked, 'How do we create genuine, high-tariff jobs and opportunities that are the product of enterprise, innovation and creativity?'.
     Which brings us back to EOWDC's planning application. To the first minister's credit he has been a consistent supporter of renewable energy and its potential to take forward Scotland's economy. He restated his commitment to renewables during a recent visit to the Aberdeen headquarters of one of the major partners within EOWDC. However he is now faced with the unenviable task of squaring the circle. EOWDC's application will be considered by the Scottish Government agency, Marine Scotland. Almost simultaneously, the first minister will have to keep Mr Trump sweet to ensure the golfing development proceeds. That will be no easy matter as the Trump organisation has very publicly drawn a line in the sand. A protracted legal battle may be in prospect.
     Mr Trump has demonstrated on many occasions that neither he nor his ego are to be taken lightly. Above all he does not like to lose face. In the past when challenged, he has threatened to pick up his ball and walk off the course. He may do so again. Indeed at a time of global economic crisis, Mr Trump may see this as a perfect opportunity to cut his losses and walk away.
     We should lose no sleep if that is the case. While the first minister attempts to ride two horses, there are signs of other horses being changed in mid-stream. Individuals and organisations, that previously would have required surgery to remove their noses from Mr Trump's backside, are making positive noises about the potential of the offshore development.
     Local and national politicians have been unwise, to say the least, in getting too close to Mr Trump and his plans. Very shortly they will find themselves between a rock and a hard place. Mr Trump is not a man to be taken lightly, but neither is the Scottish energy sector, which is willing to invest in projects that will provide long-term, high-tariff employment for the north east and beyond. In a game of high economic stakes, a golf course, even the greatest in the world, is trumped.

 

Douglas Marr CBE is a former headteacher