Eishken windfarm

An anonymous wellwisher advises me that the windfarm at Eishken has been sold; lock, stock and wind tower to EDF (Électricité de France).

Update: I'm told the E in EDF is wrong.  I must be being stupid, but ???????

I'm told that the missives are being concluded currently, and that they will be signed off shortly with transfer expected on 1 August.

If true, given the vast sums required to develop windpower, this shouldn't come as any surprise as the risk/reward trade off must be very high for any individual.  Especially with the huge probable costs and legal issues involved in constructing any power cables from wind farm to grid connection.

The EDF website makes it's wind strategy very clear, and with the pattern of consents seemingly being more valuable than the completed windfarms, it is likely that the buyers need renewables to offset their other (nuclear and conventional) emissions.


The nature of this sort of transaction is that there are few if any footprints until the deed is done, but my delving shows that there have been some changes in the structure of Beinn Mhor Power and associated companies recently; which leads me to believe that something is in the offing.

Beinn Mhor Power has very recently appointed Ms Serena Oppenheim as a director, and issued some more shares (I haven't got round to finding out about these changes yet).  In the last month, Eishken Nominees Ltd has replaced the Nominee Shareholders at McLay Murray & Spens with Nick Oppenheim, Serena Oppenheim and Peter Smith - who I believe is the Estate Manager - and moved the Registered Office to Eishken.  All of which is indicative of some active plans being brought forward.

Update: Crionaig Power Ltd had 3 x Miss Oppenheim appointed as directors in February along with Marcus Trenick QC - of windpower fame.  Loch Sealg Power Ltd was incorporated in October 2010 and is dormant.

I'm sure there is still another company, whose name escapes me at the moment.

Of course, there could be another explanation, but my source is utterly convinced and convincing that a sale is to proceed, so only time will tell.  And where does this leave the Community Trust?

All will become clear very shortly, I suspect.

------


Reproducing this article is forbidden, without my permission and then only if your fully attribute the source.  Newspapers on Francis Street, Stornoway, should remember Johann Hari before plagiarising me.

Eriskay School

These poor parents in Eriskay must be confused about the actual status of the school closure, er... discussion, er... consultation, er... whatever, er...nothing at all

According to the Bleader's Log (as it is affectionately called in the Executive Corridor), the initial discussion about the school, was not a discussion about the School in Eriskay but a discussion with the community about education provision in Eriskay, that may or may not included a discussion - and most definitely not a consultation - about the school in Eriskay.

Further clarification of the clarification makes it perfectly clear that the planned discussions weren't going to happen anyway.  At least not in the terms that were previously de-announced.

That this contradicts the position taken by the Comhairle at it's last meeting, and reiterated in private at the COSLA Meeting, and explained to Members as the outcome of the COSLA decision is neither here nor there.  I saw some of the detail last week from the unusual sources.

As the Bleader puts it:

Parents deserve to have the correct information.

Perhaps an FOI to see the internal emails and discussion might help the parents have the correct information.

Make no mistake, education provision in the islands needs reform - that's code for rationalisation, or closures - unless the birth rate picks up dramatically, but the least the Council can do is be honest about it and point out that the absence of kids is not conducive to the continued existence of a school.

The moratorium might not be right, or fair, or economically advantageous, as far as the Council is concerned, but the Government wield the big big, big stick and sometimes a different approach is required.

(Declaration of interest: I first went to Eriskay about 1975, and I loved the place.  Even just driving through it is blissful.)

Pairc - the saga continues

With Thursday seeing the next round of the legal actions in Stornoway Sheriff Court it seems fairly clear what the pattern is going to be.

The legal actions are going to be long and drawn out.

The Government have already acknowledged that the legislation is flawed, which I think means that they are on a hiding to nothing in Court; but that they will drag this out until they can decide how to rewrite the legislation.

The landlord has apparently offered the crofters an amicable buy-out, if the existing Committee remove themselves.

This last element is the most intriguing, as it shows the animosity between the existing Committee and the landlord, and represents a very smart move by Mr Lomas.  Will the existing Committee withdraw and challenge Mr Lomas to stand by his word?  Well, with silence from South Lochs, it looks like that offer has been rebutted; and that no-one seems prepared to try and knock heads together and get legal paperwork in place.

The animosity can be explained by the claims of self-interest against the Directors of Pairc Trust, in that it is claimed by Barry Lomas that the suggested siting of some turbines will give disproportionate benefit to those crofters, some of whom may be the Directors of Pairc Trust.  Let me make it very plain, M'Lud, that I do not know whether these claims have any substance, but that the Directors strongly rebut this argument.  I am aware of some matters they need to refute, rather than just rebut, but I am not aware of any substantive attempt to demolish these arguments.

And, yes, I know I have said all this before, but for the reasons that follow, these arguments need to be demolished if the Pairc buyout is to have the widest possible support; and credibility lies at the heart of that.

I was reading back through the Pairc buy-out Business Plan just recently.  It's been apparently removed from the Pairc Trust website, but if you find the old cached pages on Google, the now-deleted links still took you to the pdf; which you could download for posterity.  This probably won't be possible after tomorrow.


Page 49 of the plan - as approved by CnES and the Scottish Government - has a most interesting comment on the type of holidays that Pairc Trust will be offering to the public:

A short break (3 days) with meals would cost in the region of £200 per person per night. Extra
charges would be levied depending on which activities the holidaymakers would be enjoying.
This is averaged to 20% on top of the accommodation costs.

So a couple coming for a 3 day break would spend £1,440 - which one assumes includes ferry costs, but not petrol - instead of perhaps £500 in a 5* hotel in Edinburgh (Scotsman, advance purchase rate) of £900 for a week in Crete (Thomas Cook, Aghios Nikolaos in October).

Now why is this important?

Simply because the business plan assumes that for a one-off outlay of £9,000 (what no recurring marketing costs?), Pairc Trust will be able to sell 150 bed nights the following year, generating income of £6,000.  I did mention the 20% commission the Pairc Trust will take (at page 49), didn't I. 

The Pairc Trust as promoter would take a fee (e.g. 20%) from the holiday price to cover
promotional and organisational costs and the costs of the activities while the partners in the
enterprise would benefit from increased reliable trade and collective marketing of their local
businesses.

Now, current tariffs for B&B or self catering in South Lochs are £25 per night or £250 per week for an entire cottage; or about £50 pppn in the only hotel in the area.  All of which raises all sorts of questions about the supply of suitable accommodation, given that to upgrade is going to cost £60,000+ for the majority of current providers.  My rough and ready guess is that it will cost perhaps £1.2m to provide enough suitable accommodation in the area or as little £250,000 if there is only one new-build provider.  Where is all this going to come from on the hope of getting bookings through an untested provider selling beds in an unbuilt facility?

Realistically, you can see a new provider or two trying to fill that market; but when they can sell the beds direct or via VisitScotland, why go through the Pairc Trust.

That is just one example I have seen of an element of the business plan that has been allowed to go through, and which is being touted by local and Central Government as a model of sustainability at which large sums of money should be thrown.

If the Pairc buy-out is to succeed it must succeed on a realistic basis, and not on fantasy figures, or Barry Lomas will tear this all to pieces in Court and discredit the entire process.

Unless, of course, that gives the Government their out from the entire process and time to rewrite the laws; which the cynic in me thinks might just be the case.

Whatever happens, Pairc is going to face a long slow decline as the legal process takes it's slow and winding course; something I don't think anyone wants to see.

Council finances

I think I speak for the vast, vast majority of people in the Western Isles when we applaud the Council for the single minded determination in pursuing their support for the Coastguard Station.  Just as we all supported and applauded the efforts of the Council over the Rocket Range.

Everyone in the islands believes that this is one of the key roles of the Council, and one at which we probably all think that has almost (almost!) a limitless budget and where public support and understanding of the role of the Council can best be focussed.

So let me say "Well done" to all concerned, before I highlight the problems going forward.

If anyone was in doubt about the financial problems facing the Council, then they should read the rather understated Finance Dept reports, where the stark truth is laid bare.  The 'strategy' document is a master of obfuscation in very few words (it's probably a trait of accountants).  The presentation to members on the other hand lays the options bare [including the issue of local election next year which will undoubtedly coulour the decision making process for some]

The Council faces massive cuts in Central Government support over the next few years, and the choices are hard but the impact will be deep.

I take no pleasure in pointing out that I suggested preparing for this a year ahead of the first round of cuts being implemented.  That might have stretched the pain a bit, but it certainly won't ease it.  The next three years will see major and fundamental cuts in the Council, and staff, unions, senior officers and Councillors better realise this.

The easy targets, such as Ceolas, will be the first to go as the various funders pull their funding - death by a dozen cuts -whilst compulsory redundancies will be absolutely necessary to streamline the Council. 

Indeed, fundamental reorganisation is essential.  I would believe that it might happen if the reorganisation started by the Chief Executive in 2006 had actually come to any sort of conclusion by now; rather than being brushed under the carpet, half-done (quarter-done?).

There is going to be the loss of some services too, but these could be mitigated of the Council actually tried to find best value solutions, rather than finding the 'most acceptable' solution.  I am aware of two recent decisions where a financially more expensive and less efficient solution has been implemented.  Both are unquestionably due to 'political' decisions, and one undoubtedly benefits a senior individual personally; although the way it was done with official support or purblindness makes it just inside the rules.

All of this is going to have to go, if for no other reason than it is going to become more transparent and more public, but we face major cuts across the board that will need to be properly implemented, if we are to have a living, working, smaller Council at the end of it.

The Political fall-out from the cuts is for another day.

Blar Buidhe

Here is a tale of murky financials; tax dodges; and financial engineering above and beyond the call of reality.

Let's deal with the facts, first.  The property is owned by NHP Securities No 3 Ltd, a name that is as vague as the ultimate ownership.

NHP Securities No 3 Ltd have fixed assets worth £540,000 (recently - desperately - revalued from £535,000) which surely has to be Blar Buidhe and Blar Buidhe alone.

NHP Securities No 3 Ltd is ultimately controlled by Libra No 2 Limited, registered in the Cayman Isles, and hence to Delta Commercial Property LP, and limited partnership based in the Isle of Man.

At this point forget trying to find out who owns these companies; you can't unless they want you to.

But that's not the shocker.

Against the asset of £540,000 the company has borrowed £215,000,000; yes, a leverage ratio of 400 times assets, most of which has been used to invest in other apparently associated companies through loan notes, guarantees etc etc.  Unsurprisingly, you will find that the company is insolvent by £215,000,000, although various guarantees and promises seen to imply that these debts will never be paid.

So how and why does this make any sense.  Well, of course, in the real world it doesn't.  But here is how it works in practice....

Company A buys a property

Company B buys that assets from company A

Company A lends the money to company C in the Cayman Isles

Company C lends the money back to Company B

Company C charges 10% interest for the loan

Company A charges no interest

The interest is earned offshore, and as ultimate control resides outside the UK the interest is not taxable in the UK

The interest paid by B is a tax deduction, and the tax losses can be used to create a tax refund or tax deduction in other companies.

As the profits pile up, the loans get bigger and bigger, and the interest all moves tax-free offshore; to fund the next property.

Blar Buidhe apparently paid £24,050 rent, which has probably, ultimately, ended up tax-free in either the Cayman Isles or the Isle of Man.  If it hasn't, I'd be astonished.

That's £24,050 that could have gone towards care in the home.  That's £24,050 that has been paid by pensioners out of their meagre assets.  That's £24,050 that should have been taxed and been used to fund care, education and public services.

And multiply that through by 700 care homes, most of which are very considerably bigger.

Isn't it a scandal that the public sector is effectively funding and encouraging [perfectly legal] tax-dodging?  Bizarrely, it all started with the Inland Revenue and Mapeley Steps Ltd.

At it is going to get worse.  There is a current active proposal, which is out for consultation, allowing offshore UK-controlled financing companies to pay a tax rate of under 10% on the money they draw out of the public and private sectors.  And almost no extra tax on trading income 'earned' in tax havens.

If there is a lesson to be learned from Southern Cross, and an opportunity to be grasped, it is that public sector funded transactions must be transparent, and must avoid tax-havens.  It is easy to do; just write the conditions into the tender and demand the waiving of 'commercial confidentiality' and rebuild trust between providers and funders.

----

All this, and still on holiday too.

Royal Mail sorting office

I see that the old sorting office on Sandwick Road has been sold to "D MacLeod" for £249,999.

Can anyone shed more light on the buyer.

I'd been told that the Council had a planning application for this site, but nothing is coming up and I think it might just have been an informal pre-application discussion.

COSLA unConvention

It's almost too easy to abuse the Council, and it is very easy to find reasons to dole out that abuse, but sometimes you have to genuinely applaud the successes.

The COSLA Convention is a case in point.

Whilst it might seem to many like a series of all-expenses away-days in exotic locations like Hamilton and Kirkcaldy, these meetings are a necessary evil in building a consensus in local Government politics.

Many will complain about the hire of An Lanntair for the day; the travel expenses; the dinner in Breasclete with dancers (no not that sort!!!) and music; but I take the view that it is money broadly well spent.

Yes, it could all be done more cheaply, but if you want to show the great and the good what the islands look lie and get their understanding of the issues, then you have to splash the cash.  That many of the issues discussed bore little or no relation to the islands is irrelevant, it is about calling in the factors and the understanding of the local situation when needs must.  "Softly, softly, chatchee monkey...."

The sight of the Councillor suits walking around town last Friday morning was quite enlightening as they nursed hangovers (practicing for that night) and as they tried to remember if they were in Stranraer or Stornoway.

Anyway, my off-island sources tell me that it has raised the profile of the islands in a positive light, which can only be a good thing.

One attendee was so taken by the islands that he began impromptu Gaelic lessons on Friday with a local linguist which continued back in the hotel and late into the night.  Indeed, the lessons kept his neighbours awake late into the night, and early in the morning, but seemed to be highly successful as far as both parties were concerned.

Thankfully his plane was the last flight out, which allowed time to have an urgent refresher course.

I know the hotel; I know the Council concerned; but help with the name should be sent to my private email address.

For legal reasons, names of real Councillors posted as comments will obviously be deleted.  Unless they are so humorous/ludicrous as to pass the usual sanity checks.

Leaders Blog continued

Good work by An Cat Dubh, who posted onto their intial thoughts onto the Leaders Blog....

I am sure that the whole community can only agree with this, yet somehow the comment seem to have disappeared....

Douze points.

Leaders Blog

With most of the known world desperately trying to access the Leaders Blog using string, tin cans and half charged duracell batteries, the IT department were able to spare some bandwith to allow me to receive the photos that didn't make it onto the blog.

None of these have have their aspect ratios changed in an effort to make The Leader look taller....

(Thanks to Anon Smith for the photos)

Last post ever....

My work here is done.

No seriously; I have achieved the unexpected - a spirit of openness and candour inside the Comhairle which many thought was an impossible dream.

I refer, of course, to the Council Leader's blog - or for my German readers - Der Rat Führers Blog.

One must cheer to the rafters the unprecedented engagement with the public, and ignore the deathly prose which has suffered much at the hands of Press Officers, lawyers and assorted advisers, as they try to turn a series of press releases into one blog posting.


In out unbridled joy at the new focus on the public, we can only marvel at the ability for some many disparate subjects to be semi-coherently linked into one largely structured document.


It would be churlish to suggest that the spirit of brevity has been lost and that the opportunity to make half a dozen postings has been foregone in favour of a much delayed megapost.


The relationship with the public can only be enhanced by the ability to comment on the posts, and like many others I have been worried that my comments have not appeared, despite the use of multiple disposable email addresses to obtain passwords.  It is unclear if the author of the blog is actually monitoring comments, or if this has been left to Cllr Campbell.


However, if like me you have not seen your comments appear on the Leaders blog, then you may wish to copy them here, just so that the Comhairle is kept fully informed of the public mood, and in case any comments are lost due to 'technical problems'.


Presumably, the remaining 30 Councillors will also get full officer support to put their election addresses public positions on record.


The title of this post is facetious.

The truth will out.....

Casual readers may wonder why the Council would bother to block a modest little blog such as this.

Council leaders will claim that I am undermining the operation of the Council and the trust and working relationships they are spending years building.

To that claim I can only laugh; as they seem quite competent at undermining their own relationships.

A prime example is the (private) contempt in which Storas Uibhist is held whilst the public front of support lubricated with large sums of money continues.

Talking about development in South Uist; how is it possible for a major Council development in Uist to actually cause local businesses to close?

The answer I am told lies with simple incompetence and a massive failure in the drafting of legal documentation.
 
Fairly recently I saw a letter in the public domain from Stephen MacAulay of Askernish Quarry, about the rock being used at Ludag (link will follow when I find it again).  I was intrigued and started to dig deeper and what I found was a murky tale of startling decisions and unbelievable oversights.

Amongst the bids for the development was one which involved the transportation of rock from Askernish on the public roads to which a risk or cost factor was applied to reflect the damage to the roads and the general upheaval.  This made it more expensive than transporting the rock from Argyll.

Ooops, but the transportation from Argyll forgot to factor in any costs for using the foreshore, or indeed any permission, and Storas were not aware of that plan.  When their costs were added, that made that bid more expensive.


So a third bid was assessed and found to now be cheaper and this was the one selected.  Only now are there questions about the assessment process, given that the rock is coming from North Uist.

It is at this point that the Council realises that they haven't factored in the risk premium for transporting the rock on the roads; leaving the contractors free of any obligations.  Contracts accepted.  Deal done.

But let's cut to the chase: the outcome is that the local taxpayer is going to carry the extra costs for damage to the roads; the council will try and bury the bad news; no-one was responsible; Councillors in the dark.


Sunlight is the best disinfectant.  I'm only trying to be that little ray of sunshine for staff and Councillors.

The fall of dictatorships

As democracy takes a deeper hold across the world, it is satisfying to see the ordinary public having the opportunity to make their voice heard, even in the most difficult of circumstances.

The West - the supposed bastion of democracy - is not actually helping the situation, which might perversely make the outcome better in the long-run; whilst the oppressed peoples find their feet.  And this is something we must encourage.

Syria is probably going to be the next to fall, in my view, whilst Gadaffi is going to struggle on for years yet ('lucky' bombing permitting).  Yemen will implode.  Morocco will drift into near-democracy.  The West will finance the oppression of the Saudi's and Bahraini's for the next 5-10 years as they run a theocratic dictatorship in our name.

But the interesting part of the the Arab uprisings was how the dictatorships reacted to the popular discontent, and how they misjudged the popular mood.

The first reaction was denial; the second was to block the internet in the hope that truth somehow would become devalued or obscured by official purblindness.

Which takes us neatly to the local situation.

I spent some of the weekend showing a Councillor just how and why their Google searches were being 'modified' when they went through the Comhairle server.  It was interesting just what was missing and how the 'best results' were changed.  I could show which sites were blocked by the Council, including this one, and how to bypass the blocks (more detail to follow shortly).

Some Councillors try to reach the truth

The Councillor was duly concerned about how their access to free information was being constrained; who had authorised this; and how it was reported and discussed inside the Council.  (answer: executive decision not subject to democratic reporting or control)

When it can be shown that some Council controlled searches excluded some relevant Council minutes* (probably by accident, rather than design), then said Councillor was interested, very interested.  That makes 1 out of 31.  Any other takers??

Anyway, as oppressive, unresponsive dictatorship crumble under the weight of their own destructive actions, lies, disregard for the public, irrelevance and self-importance, we can only hope that the Arabs can follow our lead.

* Google and cookie effects adjusted for.

Equateq

Good news from the Breasclete factory, where they have signed a long-term supply agreement with a Nasdaq listed company, the Amarin Corp.

I understand that this is worth $20m and will secure the future of the plant for many years to come.

These are exactly the sort of highly-skilled jobs that these islands can deliver, and the type of product - fresh, pure and healthy - that we should be encouraging to develop in the islands.

How the Council works

I have been sent a copy of the top secret submission by the Council to the Audit Commission demonstrating it's good practices.

This presentation is to be the subject of a three day seminar to members.....

Pulling together


Thanks to the assistant depute to the depute assistant manager in the Sideways-Looking Navel-Gazing Team for the leak.

The Supreme Court

I'm very disappointed about the tone of the recent attacks on the Supreme Court, and especially the recent comments by Alex Salmond.

I fully understand the politics behind his comments, but that does not lessen their attempt to undermine justice.

That they have been made primarily because of one individual case that looks to be the subject of a retrial, makes the attack even less responsible.

Were I am accused or a solicitor for the accused, I would want to know that there are routes of appeal where Judges may have got it wrong, and where the best founded cases have a chance of another hearing.

No-one is suggesting that the Judges always get it right, any more than the Police are, or lawyers, or the legislation, or witness.  And sometimes the evidence can be wrong.

Is it better to leave people languishing in jail where there may have been a miscarriage of justice, rather than to reopen a case, just because it is heard in another jurisdiction?

Lockerbie was heard in another jurisdiction under Scots Law.  The Privy Council and the House of Lords (as well as the Supreme Court) are in another jurisdiction but very often heard Scottish cases which then formed accepted Scots Law.  There is an appeal route to Europe for Human Rights issues, which is held under European Law.  None of these are new.

To try to close an appeal route because of one instance where the Scottish Courts are told that they might have got it wrong is a disastrous course, no matter how you dress it up.

I had hoped that this would blow over, but it is looking more and more like being a major bone of contention where none should - or needs to - exist; and the tone of the comment is now doing no service whatsoever to the role of First Minister.

Council redundancies

After the wave of voluntary retirements has seriously depleted the strength in depth of the Council, word reaches me about the second wave of compulsory retirements.

Of course, they are not being described as that, but being presented as part of an overall reorganisation.

I have been told about a number of staff who are being encouraged to leave, even if they don't want to, on terms that they aren't very happy with.

All this poses questions about the strategy that has been followed.  If there are staff who need to be 'reorganised' now, wouldn't have made more sense to 'reorganise' them before you let the skills, knowledge and experience of the senior staff walk out the door with a package.

That way, you could have ensured that no massive gaps appear in the organisation....

Just a thought.



(Samizdat newspapers in the Whitehouse please copy)

Rural school closures

"It isn't about money" says both the Councils and the Minister.

Fibbers.

It is precisely about money, whether they like to admit it or not.

The Comhairle has committed the cash they expect to save to other projects.  The Minister hasn't got the cash to bung Councils a further subsidy.

The proposed resolution from the Minister - "find the savings elsewhere".  To which the Councils pose the simple question - "Where?"

With COSLA backing the Councils, or more accurately, the Councils united on the issue, we have a Mexican stand-off, with the added twist that the Minister has already admitted the current legislation is flawed and he may not be able to stop closures.

I suspect that the Council will any legal action, but that the Minister will then string out taking decisions until new legislation is in place; leading to a last minute compromise of 'cash for schools'.

And for added spice, our local MSP has already announced that he is going to have nothing to do with the decisions, leaving schools campaigners out on their own.

The islands are littered with empty schools; perhaps if we found a way to fill them with pupils, we wouldn't need to have this debate.

Google adwords

The only advertising that our business does is via Google Adwords; having abandoned print advertising almost entirely.

I've just spent today reducing our exposure and the range of advertising that we do, as we need a bit of a breather to catch up with all the work that has been generated.

We estimate that every £1 spent on the internet - domains, Adwords etc - is generating about £350 in new turnover, which is a good result by any reckoning, but we actually need to throttle growth for a few months so that we can properly control and assess how we manage that growth.

It's a good complaint, but we need a bit of a life over the summer and to catch up with everything else that is going on.

The law of (un)intended consequences

The restrictions on the use of ADS for 'business' purposes are really starting to bite.

And not where I expected.

A local group of volunteers regularly attend meetings on the mainland, for a charitable body in which they participate.  As it is a large organisation and people are travelling from all over Scotland, a staff member at the HQ makes the bookings.

Not any more.  An attempt to book the plane for the group of local volunteers was refused on the grounds that it was "business travel".

The suggestion from the ADS team - that the individuals book their "business travel" personally, and then it wouldn't be rejected.  Quite apart from having to carry the cost, and the hassle factor of doing so, they are effectively being told by the regulator to lie when buying their tickets.

"You will not dissent without my permission"

Just in what warped definition of "business" does a not for profit charitable organisation become excluded through the regulations that were sneaked in just before the election?

Hark: is that the sound of the MSP or MP standing up for their constituents?

Blockages

I was tempted to write "If you work in the Comhairle and can't read this, then please let me know", but sanity prevailed.

A Council employee reports that they can't access the blog through their Comhairle issue computer.

It sounds like the whitelist has not been updated for the individual or their overall permissions are incorrectly set, but I just want to check that I'm not inadvertently being blacklisted......