In
the not too distant future, the voters of Rutherglen and Hamilton West maybe
going to the polls, if the petition to remove the sitting MP Margret Ferrier
passes the hurdle of 10% of the electorate. The by-election on paper seems to
be a ‘shoo in’ for the Labour Party who traditional pull a sizeable vote in the
constituency. The SNP leadership jumped on the bandwagon against Ferrier when
it came out she had travelled to London despite knowing she had tested positive
for covid. Of course, she wasn’t the only who broke the rules, but sometimes in
politics a political goat is staked out for the public. Ferrier is the poster
child of anyone who broke the covid rules at Westminster. What happens to these
other people, some in government? Well simply nothing, they are going on with
their lives so problems there. In many ways, the use of the political goat isn’t
new, in the Westminster expenses scandal; a few goats were needed to protect
the bulk of the MPs being exposed to the bright light. You could argue the
merits whether Margaret Ferrier is being treated unfair; after all, her own
party disowned her for political reasons during the Nicola Sturgeon era, the
rest of the parties are just ‘playing the game’. In other words, its politics,
justice, fairness or ethical reasons play no part in that, in the race to
attain power, destroying a person is acceptable, under the guise of being noble.
One thing I have learned in politics, there are very few white knights, and you
should learn this too, and keep remembering it.
Speaking of non white Knights, the Muslim leader of the SNP or ‘albatross’ Humza Yousaf isn’t having a good pre election cycle; Rutherglen is a test of his ‘new’ leadership. Or to be more accurate, this is Sturgeon’s leadership by proxy in action. Of course, it seems there is no sign of Nicola Sturgeon on the stump yet, which would cause a flurry of questions, mostly relating to alleged missing SNP funds. No, Sturgeon is being hidden from sight, as she constantly points out to anyone appearing to listen, she is innocent, but she wouldn’t give the same endorsement to her husband Peter Murrell. Don’t expect to see Murrell out campaigning either, not in a campaign office or on a doorstep, he has like Sturgeon decided to stay hidden. Oh, before I forget, he is innocent until proven guilty, just like everyone who has been arrested. In my time as an SNP activist, I noticed that SNP HQ effectively decamped from Edinburgh to run a big by-election. Everyone who was seen to be a serious activist turned up at this type of event, minor election like council didn’t rate a presence of many well known kiddie on faces, but Westminster and Holyrood by-elections rated as special. In fact, you could say, the SNP ran these type of elections well. They had all the bases covered, money, staffers and resources all lined up.
This election if it comes off will be different, as well as the current situation of having a party seen as corrupt, incompetent and ultimately useless, Humza Yousaf has picked a dud to take the hit and lose gracefully. Katy Loudon, a councillor from South Lanarkshire is Madam Escosse Donkey in this election. Although Loudon takes the public hit at the podium when the result is released, the real loser is Humza Yousaf, this is his first big electoral test since taking over as SNP leader. The question is how badly will he lose? Even party insiders think the defeat will be major; words like thumping are being bandied around inside his camp. For a party used to success having a weak leader, poor candidates and policies that the public doesn’t want is only part of the problem. The real issue for Humza Yousaf is how to get rid of Nicola Sturgeon and Peter Murrell, if there was ever a man praying for the cops to kick the door in and cart people off, it’s Humza Yousaf.
At present, we sit and wait for a countdown, for the petition to close; to see if the required number of signatures has been reached that triggers the by-election. If it happens, all the political parties will invade Rutherglen and Hamilton West for the next six weeks of the active election or ‘short campaign’. Humza Yousaf is committed to fight this election, he has no choice. Sturgeon backed him into a corner, if there was ever a guy praying for the petition to fail, I suspect it would be Humza Yousaf. Everyone else is baying for blood; they want Rutherglen to be the catalyst of collapse. If the SNP support collapses, it calls into question should there be a change of leadership? The bad taste of how Humza Yousaf was elected by the Sturgeon cabal is still strong in the mouths of the SNP members; they have a legit reason for not turning up at Rutherglen. One SNP councillor has privately admitted they could not “in good conscience” ask people to vote for the SNP at the present time. In politics at by-election, you sell not just the candidate but also the party, where is the positive spin, that you could put on the Humza Yousaf and the SNP? Yousaf is seen as fake, false and insincere, I campaigned with him; I know firsthand, he is lazy and not very bright.
If you’re an SNP Activist is the smart bet to stay away? Many apparently report “embarrassment” at being asked to promote a party on the doorstep which is mired in sexual and financial sleaze, a police probe, and lack of progress on independence. The public have wised up to the running gag that a vote for the SNP is a vote for independence; this is the trick that Nicola Sturgeon used post 2014 time and time again, I dubbed it ‘the mandate con’. Every election was a mandate for the Sturgeon cult to continue to slice off public funds to keep their luxury lifestyle going. In return, the public got crumbs, crumbs, crumbs and more crumbs. So sure was Sturgeon of her power, she openly pissed on Scots and didn’t even pretend to call it rain. Everything post Salmond in the SNP was all about protecting and promoting Nicola Sturgeon, it was never about Scotland, it was about her. Labour sources say the SNP vote is “very soft” with an unusually high proportion of former SNP voters now describing themselves as don’t knows. The Great Awakening is happening, of course when you stab your former candidate in the back, you can’t expect public support. The previous election with Margaret Ferrier saw the SNP having a majority of 5,230 in the seat, I think we can say that majority is gone or seriously dented.
If 10% of the registered electors in Ferrier’s seat, or 8,113 out of 81,124 people sign the petition in person, it is game on, it triggers a by-election which in theory Margaret Ferrier could also stand. The SNP plans to move the writ for the by-election as soon as Westminster returns from summer recess in September. If the timetable goes to plan, it means a by-election in early October. For those unfamiliar with by-elections, they can prove very educational for activists, generally fast paced and with a variety of activists who have extensive experience. I always recommend campaigning in these special events as a way of gaining valuable insight into how the party works. The Labour Party has a strong base of support in Rutherglen to work from, they need to tap into the previous soft SNP voters and make a serious pitch for their vote. In a whiff of how defeat is running through the Yousaf camp, an SNP source believes the party would be lucky to get 25% in a by-election. Their words give you a sense of the mood,
“It’s a goner. It’ll be a total thumping. Folk are embarrassed to go out and push for the party. Katy Loudon is a good person but she’s not a unifying candidate.”
Katy Loudon is the dug to be kicked about the streets for the next six weeks. She is the person who doesn’t want to speak to the press except at stage managed photo ops. Scottish Labour isn’t just looking for a win, they want to see low double digit SNP voters. SNP MSP John Mason, who won the Glasgow East Westminster by-election in 2008 by 365 votes, and whose Shettleston seat is next to Rutherglen & Hamilton West, said it was too early to predict the result. Is it really John? I did 16 days on John Mason’s 2008, it was a hard fought campaign, the SNP had a better situation then, their current predicament is beyond terrible.
Mason added:
“I think it’s going to be a challenge for the SNP but I’ll certainly be going over and campaigning if it goes ahead. I think if Labour don’t win it, I think it will be quite embarrassing for them. The SNP has had a few challenges recently. You can’t go on forever being the party of government and winning every single election. When you’re older and you’ve been involved in this longer, you’re maybe a little bit more relaxed about it. But every party is going to have ups and down along the way. Labour used to control everything in Glasgow and Scotland and that eventually came to an end. So the SNP’s not going to ride high forever and ever. I certainly hope that we’ll hold this by-election and I’ll certainly be out there campaigning and I’m sure a lot of other people will as well, but ultimately it’s in the hands of the voters.”
Hardly upbeat is he?
Finally,
the last time the SNP fought a by-election it spent £98,958 out of the £100,000
legal limit, yet it failed to gain Shetland from the Liberal Democrats,
who spent £64,534. The SNP is committed to spending big, not for Katy Loudon,
but to shore up its vote. If there is a spectacular implosion, this will damage
Humza Yousaf severely as leader. The makeover by the SNP to make him ‘likeable’ has
bombed something which the KateForbes camp can't have failed to notice. He is as I have mentioned, fake, false and insincere, his man of the
people act is rather unimpressive; he literally has nothing to offer the people
or Scotland. Rutherglen and Hamilton West could prove to be his Waterloo. Humza
Yousaf’s activists don’t want to sell the party, they don’t want to be there,
and really can you blame them? This election for the SNP might be dubbed the ‘payroll
campaign’ because why would anyone not being paid want to turn up.
Dear All,
ReplyDeleteI attach the 5No Visual Inspection Reports that the Council are relying upon, with this Email. My experience has been that certifying a building as safe, based upon these and the results of settlement monitoring, would amount to "reckless certification" which is a criminal offence and I have made that point several times in the past.
I overmarked these Visual Inspection Reports with a series of questions that were immediately obvious to me at the time, but they were never answered by the Council. Is it the case that by getting these questions answered now, by the Council, you all begin to understand the problem and that allows a solution to be found? I suspect it might be as simple as that.
I include, at the end, the opinions of the ASCE experts that you have all seen many times before but, in the context of the Council's Visual Inspection Reports, this information looks all the more persuasive, doesn't it. Respondent 18, Selvem Raman, looks to me as if he has understood this very clearly, but they all did. It is only Aberdeen City Council that I am having a problem with and that, presumably, is where the rest of you elect to make your supporting contributions?
Dear Ms Baillie,
The question of "locus" is answered by the two meetings referred to this morning, but also to the two letters by the Scottish Government's Jonathan Moore, dated 30/9/16 and 7/10/16, attached below. So, can I presume the question of locus has now been finally answered?
As you know, I am very anxious to have my involvement in this case ended now.
I always wondered why the SNP engineered this by-election. Do you know why? I think we know later today if it will in fact go-ahead. 10% is a lot of people and it always seemed to be to be a high bar. But, we'll soon know.
ReplyDeleteThere is no doubt that people are changing the way they vote. In the Highlands, there was always a good Liberal vote but that disappeared after the Lib/Lab pact and it never returned.
The Labour vote was crushed about 10 years ago because people wised-up that they were being taken for mugs. Will Labour's vote recover? It will recover significantly because they are the opposition, but will it recover enough?
The SNP just appear to me to be directionless, trading water and waiting to be replaced at Holyrood. They will pay a price for their coalition with the Greens. £80m the DRS scheme has cost while Fergus Ewing's A90 duelling is shelved indefinitely. These are the things that will cost them, especially in the Highlands.
George - Whenever I receive any kind of correspondence from Aberdeen City Council, it always contains an arrogant and aggressive edge. I remember they sent the Police round to my house 5 years ago to warn me to take nothing more to do with Brimmond School. No-one really wants to deal with Aberdeen City Council and that is what has taken all of the time. Buro Happold, the Institution of Civil Engineers and the Health and Safety Executive are now involved and so I reckon the great big cover-up will soon be exposed - it has probably been exposed already.
ReplyDeletesubmit a DSAR to the Police for that information, and make it public too.
DeleteGeorge - The Managing Director of Buro Happold is personally leading this now. She is the equivalent of Jack Gillum and Hugh Mallett is the equivalent of Dan Duncan and so, potentially, this could all land at their door. So, it looks like it has been solved at last by a member of the public, a blogger called George, the experts of the ASCE and Bob Matheson of Protect. I hope very much that we can all be paid now and allowed to get on with the rest of our lives.
ReplyDeletePostal votes and proxy votes were acceptable at Rutherglen and so I expect the Labour Party will have made full use of that facility. I cannot see the public flocking to Labour somehow, it will be a reluctant trickle at best. Labour will do nothing for anyone and we all know that. I noticed with some amusement that Humza announced that our Passports would revert back to red again, from blue. First of course he has to negotiate our exit from the UK and our membership of the EU. No detail on how he's going to manage that (yet).
ReplyDeleteGeorge - Hugh Mallett is the key man and I expect him to come out in support of myself and the ASCE experts pretty soon. He may have done it already. There is too much pressure and he cannot delay any longer.
ReplyDeleteThere will be much indignation and the usual suspects will say "No me". That is why worldwide whistle-blowing laws ought to be respected. It could have been sorted-out effortlessly in 2014 and insurance would have paid for everything.
There's supposed to be something like a 10% shift across the board in SNP support towards Labour and in Rutherglen Labour only need a 5% shift and so it be routine?
ReplyDeleteScottish Labour is the clear fav on paper, if they don't win it rather big, then some of the shine may come off their possible future prospects in 2024. They know this, hence they are chucking everything into a win.
DeleteGeorge - Buro Happold are trying to blame the Contractor just now and that might not work. They're at last paying attention to ASCE Ethics Case Study 2 - The Hyatt Regency Walkway Collapse. There, the Contractor escaped all accountability and it was the design engineer and his Managing Director that were blamed, specifically because they were asked to check the design change and they stated that they had checked it and that it was OK. They have the same scenario here and you couldn't get any more analogous to the Hyatt Regency, than Brimmond School. If these arrogant fools would only listen, investigate and respond this could have been sorted-out years ago. In the case of the Hyatt, Jack Gillum didn't know anything about the design change, but he was blamed for it anyway because he was Managing Director of the Company; that's often the way it works.
ReplyDeleteI read in the Scotsman there: "Dame Jackie Baillie" - I knew about this and I remember reading about it a few weeks ago. Fuck knows what she did to deserve that...does anyone know? Anyway, it must have arrived in the post. I don't even know if it's a medal or a certificate. It's quite funny really, Dame Jackie Baillie; God help us all.
ReplyDeleteNo one with a brain who remembers Li@bour in power will ever think twice about voting for them. The Tories and SNP may be mince, but anything is better than Li@bour.
ReplyDeleteGeorge - You have set-out above the reason why engineering in Scotland is now moribund. Holyrood have had more than enough time to wreck engineering and that is what they have done. If forty of the best engineers in the world say "black" and Shona Robison says "white", then Jackie Baillie goes with Shona Robison. There's absolutely nothing that Jackie Baillie can do....do you believe that?
ReplyDeleteDear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteWith respect, you are not an expert engineer and nor is Ms Robison and that would appear to be the problem here.
The action is with Buro Happold's Ms Winfield. This is all about authority and Buro Happold have authority until they conclude on the matter. Then, once they have done that, and issued their recommendations, authority passes to the Scottish Government.
What I advise all of you to do is wait until Buro Happold conclude. This is an extraordinarily serious matter and, with the school due to re-open in 2-weeks, it must be done properly.
I am not asking for you to engage with the Universal Credit and I will do that. What I am asking you to do is await Ms Winfield's guidance and if it proves that I have been correct for the past 9-years, and that is what I am expecting it to do, negotiate my payment of lost earnings and a new job from the Scottish Government.
So, wait until you receive guidance from Ms Winfield before you do or say anything please.
Dear Ms Winfield,
ReplyDeleteThe Client, in this case Hub/Aberdeen City Council, require to ask for your guidance and contractually, you must provide it. That is my understanding and I must say that I am surprised that you have not been asked.
I have stated that you are the only engineer with authority to provide such guidance. I do not have authority, the experts of the ASCE don't have authority and those who provided the Visual Inspection Reports don't have authority either.
The risk we all have is that Ms Baillie and Ms Robison are speaking as if they have authority.
If the Visual Inspection Reports are incorrect, then say that and that is all that is required.
I presume that is acceptable to you?
Dear Ms Winfield,
ReplyDeleteMay I simplify this for everyone? I attach one of the Visual Inspection Reports; it is by Fairhurst. If you take a look at page 3, "2.2 Background", it states:
"We understand that Ogilvie Construction and Buro Happold have made representations in response to these points, ultimately confirming their joint position that the claims are unfounded."
The claims were:
"1. There is a potential risk of sub-soil inundation collapse caused by mobile groundwater washing fines from the underlying soils.
2. Pre development underground drainage works were impacted by the development work, leading to a rise in water table".
My claims are stated correctly and these were the claims answered by the ASCE members in 2017. The question is: "Did Buro Happold in actually state that the claims were unfounded?"
You do not require to be instructed by anyone to answer this and I would suggest that you do answer it because, if you do not do that, it may be implied that you agree and that you did say the claims were unfounded. That has been the allusion that has persisted until now.
You may wish to review this with your team? I am making this suggestion in order to save time as I am conscious that everything routed through this client body is made needlessly difficult.
As I have already stated, once this is answered then all matters can be concluded. May I finally say that for such an easy problem to take this long to resolve (9-years!) suggests to me that there is something far wrong with the way we are managing the industry here.
Operation Branchform is getting more and more intriguing, isn't it. It should culminate in something (or nothing) at around Christmas time. There is another agency involved, the National Crime Agency (or something like that). Whatever they are investigating sounds like it has been going-on for years and not weeks or months. It happens though, in a surprising number of countries throughout the world.
ReplyDeleteI take a look at Wings over Scotland almost every day. It's not as good as it used to be and much of the optimism is gone. One or two guys go on and on about the Bill of Rights and that's tiresome. Anyway, the subject of "Scotland's Oil" is never far below the surface and one chap who has started writing in is called "Ebenezer Scroggie". Whoever this guy is, knows what he is talking about. He's cleared up more conspiracies about who owns what and who's entitled to the profits in the past few days than you have probably heard in your life. He's just beginning to lose his temper now, but he's been terrific these past few days.
ReplyDeleteHe turns up some great stuff, and the comments section is worth a visit. You do get the sense that they are pissed off how Sturgeon conned them.
DeleteDear All,
ReplyDeleteI think that with such a short time left until the school re-opens, I should reprise the situation once again for all of you and, after having sent something like 1500No (mostly repetitive) Emails on this subject over the past 9-years, I sincerely hope that this is the last that I will have to send.
I presume that no-one wants to go back to the Press with this? The last time this appeared in the Press, it was stated that the school could collapse at any time and that is the prognosis that now has to be properly answered, before the school re-opens.
Let me restate again that this is due to a construction mistake made by the contractor and that I am not questioning the original design. As a result of that mistake, which was made during construction, the land is sinking and flooding with groundwater and that will lead to the inevitable deformation, or collapse, of the school. You are all aware of this mistake and it has been explained many times to you.
Jackie Baillie appeared in the last Press story and demanded satisfactory checks be carried-out by Aberdeen City Council. These checks were carried-out, but they were Visual Inspection Reports, instead of the proper design reviews by geotechnical experts that the law requires.
The Scottish Government and Aberdeen City Council nevertheless accepted them but crucially, have Buro Happold accepted them?
Ms Winfield said yesterday that her Company hadn't carried-out a design review because the client hadn't asked them to. I expressed surprise that the client would ask, and pay, a third party to do that, when Buro Happold had design liability and would do it authoritatively and under the Contract, free of charge. No-one has responded and so I remain surprised!
The Visual Inspection Reports that have been carried-out, name Buro Happold and they state that Buro Happold have checked the design and that they are satisfied with it. Is this true? If it is not true, then they have a duty to correct it, to let everyone know that they have corrected it, and to do that instantly. I say that because it is very clear that the allusion has been drawn over the years, due to their silence on the matter, that they have acquiesced to these Visual Inspection Reports?
If they furthermore express their opinion on the engineering reliability of the Visual Inspection Reports, vis a vis the Soil Investigation Report and their own design strategy, then we should reach a stage, later today, when all of the Visual Inspection Reports can be withdrawn.
That scenario would mean that Aberdeen City Council would be expected to re-check the as-built design using Hugh Mallett of Buro Happold, with possible supporting advice from Dr Turner of Fairhurst and Dr Bond from CEN. That would give all of you the expert engineering reassurance that is required prior to the school reopening. This is what I refer to above as a real check, or a proper design review.
Dear Ms Winfield,
1. In the event of a collapse, the risk that I see is that the allegation could conceivably be made that the building has been "recklessly certified" and that, as I understand it, is a criminal offence in Scotland.
2. If certification until now has been based upon Visual Inspection Reports and the results of "settlement monitoring", then that is clearly a risk.
Dear Ms Baillie and Mr Sarwar,
ReplyDeleteLet me re-emphasise that Universal Credit have given me a lot more time than would usually be the case and that is because they appreciate the unique circumstances that I have found myself in. However, that time is up on Friday.
They are not interested in reviewing 1500No Emails and they only want to know why none of them were taken seriously.
I suggested that I meet, or speak to, Mr McAteer. Can I do that and I leave the rest of you to discuss and agree the strategy for re-opening the school? As you know, Mr McAteer will have to be instructed to contact me, by the Scottish Government.
Can that be done today, please? The meeting can then take place at any time before Friday.
Dear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteThe Scottish Government has made two statements:
Statement 1: The school is considered "safe" and "compliant" because it has been subjected to 5No "Visual Inspection Reports" and it is currently subject to "Settlement Monitoring". On Friday, I explained to you that this strategy is unlawful. When I say "unlawful" that may apply to everyone in authority who has been informed of this situation and who has elected to do nothing about it and that is most of you, isn't it?
Statement 2: The Scottish Government said that it had "no locus" in my claim for lost earnings and a job. I have explained the locus to you; it is contained in the two letters attached by the Scottish Government's Jonathan Moore. These letters establish that if the Scottish Government had taken me seriously at the time and carried-out the checks that I asked, the problem would have been solved then and insurance would have paid.
Therefore, both statements are incorrect, aren't they? They are obviously incorrect. I have explained this to you many, many times and so can you explain it to the Scottish Government and do it now, please?
I expect to be paid by the end of this week and to be working again on Monday and I want to make that very clear. Whistle-blowing, or making a public interest protected disclosure, should be over within 4-8 weeks and this has lasted for 9-years. Frankly, it disgraces all of you that are sitting on your hands and letting it happen.
Kindly ensure that the Scottish Government instructs Mr McAteer to contact me. As I said earlier today, the meeting should take place before Friday. Universal Credit are professionals and they should not be taken for fools.
Dear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteI have spent a great deal of time explaining this to you.
The Scottish Government is very clearly wrong and all of us can see that. Your job is to explain that and if you have the opinions of more than 40No expert engineers against the opinions of Shona Robison, then that should be very easy to do?
Then, once you have done that, explain that a meeting with Mr McAteer is necessary because your constituent has been unemployed, needlessly, for the best part of 9-years and that must be brought to an end, now.
Liability for paying my lost earnings and providing me with a job, lies with the Scottish Government and I expect that to be settled to an outcome with Mr McAteer, on Friday.
Dear All,
ReplyDeleteCan I suggest that Thursday's meeting between myself and Mr McAteer, goes ahead? That means that my own case can be settled this week, leaving the much more complex case of the safety of the school and the land to be settled, next week? As I'm sure you will all appreciate, it is high-time that I was paid and returned to work.
It seems to me that Ms Baillie is trying to stop a proper investigation and she cannot do that. It's as if she wants this problem to just go-away. I don't know how many times I have tried to explain how these investigations work, and I tried again yesterday as you all witnessed, but she isn't listening.
I would urge all of you to pay close attention to the advice of the Buro Happold team in the week ahead and forget everything else. They are the only party authorised to adjudicate on these matters and their advice is the only advice that counts, frankly. I see it as inevitable that they will accord with the ASCE experts and that is what I would be preparing for.
Dear Natalie,
Can you advise if I can see Mr McAteer this week, please? Any day except Friday suits me.
Dear Natalie,
ReplyDeleteI understand that the school re-opens for teaching on the 22nd August. That means that teacher "in-service days" will start in about 10-days from now. So, some big decisions need to be made urgently, don't they.
The safety of the building and the land surrounding it is being investigated by Buro Happold and I presume that is now agreed by everyone? Whether it is compliant and safe, or non-compliant and unsafe will be for them to decide and they will inform their client, Aberdeen City Council, accordingly.
It is then for the Council to convey the result of that to the Scottish Government and it will be for the Scottish Government to decide whether the school opens on the 22nd August, or if it needs to be re-certified and, if so, by whom and when.
I have asked that Mr McAteer achieves a settlement and a return to work for me and this should be reached before Buro Happold advise on the safety of the school. The reason I say that is because, as I said last night, it is entirely likely that Buro Happold's opinion will reflect the ASCE opinions of 2017 and the ASCE opinions reflected my opinion of 2014. So, it's been a needless 9-year wait for me.
I have stated that the Scottish Government are responsible for my losses and I base that on their letters to me of 30/9/16, 7/10/16 and the meeting minutes of 17/8/16 and 22/5/19. Mr McAteer attended one of the meetings with me, he has read and understood the letters and the minutes and I attach the relevant data trailing at the end of this Email.
My position is that I will not be accepting any financial loss as a result of the past 9-years and the Scottish Government is fortunate that I elected to persevere and stay the course and I would expect that also to be the public perception. Ms Baillie, for whatever reason, still sees it differently.
I am due to meet Universal Credit on Friday and my intention is that I am able to inform them that a settlement has been reached and that I am returning to work. In order to do that, my meeting with Mr McAteer will ideally need to be on Thursday or Friday am and it will be a final outcome meeting.
I want to give you this information as early as possible so that Mr McAteer can prepare.
George - I'm pretty sure that's it all over and I'll inevitably be proven correct. I'll let you know. 10-days until the school opens and so it will be soon.
ReplyDeleteDear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteMy appointment with Universal Credit is tomorrow at 9.50am and so I will need to inform them today if I am meeting Mr McAteer tomorrow instead. As you know, meeting Mr McAteer would be my preference and although I cannot speak for Universal Credit, I suspect it would be their preference too. The decision is for you and your colleagues at Holyrood and so please respond and tell me what I should do?
Your duty as a parliamentarian is to protect the public interest by making sure that the professionals are doing their job. It is not to prevent them from doing their job and the Email you sent me on Monday evening (trailing) suggests that is what you are trying to do and that is very clearly not the way our political and legal system is supposed to work.
My professional responsibility as an engineer was to make a "public interest protected disclosure" and I did that in September 2014. Responsibility for communicating and managing the investigation lies with all of you; it doesn't lie with me. You seem to have decided to deal with the matter of the whistle-blower right at the very end? You have had many opportunities not to do that, but that is your decision?
In truth it makes little difference to me because the safety of the school is probably within a day or two of being decided upon. In fact, it may already have been done and so I am prepared to wait. However, I suspect the public perception of this case will not be helped if whistle-blowers in Scotland are seen to be treated with this kind of disrespect by MSP's.
Is that fair and would you all agree with that?
Dear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteJust how many times do I have to repeat this?
The Scottish Government's refusal was predicated upon them stating that they had no "locus" in my case and I provided evidence, to you and to the others, of the Scottish Government's locus. My position on this can be supported by an Advocate lawyer and so your personal opinion is meaningless and that is why politics and law are separate entities in this and most other countries.
The evidence shows that the Scottish Government have known about this case since 2016 and they have elected to do nothing. That may be because they failed to take it seriously, or it may be because they lack honesty, or it may be because they lack competence.
Neither yourself nor Ms Robison, can arbitrate here. You are both parliamentarians and your function is to make sure that the complaint is properly investigated by engineering experts, Buro Happold in this case, and that is the way world governments work.
So, there are two issues to be dealt with immediately:
1. The safety of the school building and the land and that is the responsibility of Buro Happold's engineers.
2. My settlement and that is the responsibility of yourself and Mr McAteer.
2 should not be predicated on 1, but as I explained earlier, that appears to be your preferred route to an outcome and there is nothing I can do to affect that at this stage. All that I can say is that it is not the way these cases are dealt with in the UK, or internationally.
Bob Matheson of Protect sent the following advice to you on 30th November 2022:
"The issue, as I understand it, is that there is a prima facie case of significant risk to the public, and those in charge appear to be relying only on visual reports as a rebuttal - however visual reports have been previously established as inappropriate and inadequate in these circumstances.
The key is getting someone with responsibility to answer to this point; all the better if they are qualified to give their professional view on the safety (or lack thereof) of the building as well."
Are we in a position to answer Bob Matheson's question now? We are, aren't we?
I want to get paid all of my losses by the Scottish Government and returned to work and I am asking for that to be done now. Everyone else will want this school and the land surrounding it to be rectified before members of the public are killed.
I am copying this to Universal Credit and my point to them has been: "I am here because I have not been paid for the best part of 9-years; I have done their jobs for them - they are being paid, but I am not being paid." Now, my question to you earlier was: "Should I be speaking to Universal Credit tomorrow, or to Mr McAteer." Please answer the question.
Dear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteI spoke to Universal Credit a short time ago and I am copying this Email to them.
We are waiting on Buro Happold's response to the trailing Email sent to them at 7.51pm on Monday 7th August. If Buro Happold confirm that I am correct, and I expect them to do that, then that establishes the Scottish Government locus and I would expect yourself, and Ms Robison, to respect that and get-on with the important matters of fixing the school and getting me paid and back to work.
I notice that my outgoing Emails are being blocked to all but yourself, Ms McLauchlin and Audit Scotland just now. If Buro Happold, the HSE and Protect are being blocked then that, in the context of a safety investigation, is unlawful. This has happened before of course and perhaps you should be doing something about it?
Dear Mr Stewart,
ReplyDeleteI am conscious that the school is due to open next week and so we should endeavour to get this matter settled as quickly as possible.
I attach the 5No Visual Inspection Reports that Ms Baillie, and the Scottish Government, are relying upon.
I have overmarked them with my comments. As you will see, these are nowhere near the standard required for compliance with EC7. Nevertheless, this is the information that is currently being used to certify the building and the land as safe and that concerns me greatly.
We are in a situation where only the authorized engineer is able to carry-out a final adjudication and I understand that to be Buro Happold's Hugh Mallett?
I do not require to see his advice, but it is absolutely crucial that it is issued to the others listed here, without delay.
Dear Mr Stewart,
ReplyDeleteI attach the only letter that I have received from Hugh Mallett.
The key paragraph is highlighted and we are now all aware of the balance of evidence: It is my opinion which is supported by 40No ASCE experts and the Soil Investigation Report, versus the Scottish Government/Aberdeen City Council opinion which is supported by the 5No Visual Inspection Reports, which I sent to you earlier today.
Mr Mallett doesn't refer to my evidence, only to the Scottish Government/Aberdeen City Council evidence; is there a reason for that? Presumably, Ms Baillie had my evidence, but elected not to send it to you? It's either that, or Ms Baillie did send it and Hugh Mallett, for whatever reason, ignored it? It's not at-all satisfactory, is it?
Whilst no-one can criticize Buro Happold for not reviewing the evidence correctly, when you only had one side of the evidence to review, you clearly do have all of the evidence now. The ASCE experts started delivering their guidance within a few days and Buro Happold have had 4-days already and so that is perhaps time enough?
Dear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteMy claim for payment of loss of earnings and a replacement job was refused by the Scottish Government on the basis that they had no liability for it.
If I am proven correct by Buro Happold, and it seems entirely possible that I will be, then I expect my case to be re-opened immediately and an apology issued to me.
Dear All,
ReplyDeleteWith Brimmond School due to open again next week, we need to draw this to a close now as time has caught-up with us. I recall Edinburgh City Council were working 24/7 on the final week when re-certifying their schools and so I would ask all of you to accept that these daily Emails from myself are part of the investigative process. Ms Baillie often expresses the allusion that there is something unusual about this, but my experience has been that this is the normal iterative engineering design review process and if you don't do this, nothing gets done.
This was examined quite extensively at the Cole Inquiry and the conclusion was that it was normal. What was asked for in 2014 was a design review by Buro Happold and I was given instead a series of Visual Inspection Reports and that is the problem we are addressing now. The engineering investigation in the intervening 9-years has been done by myself and the ASCE members. It hasn't been done by any of you and so, frankly, I fail to understand what you are all complaining about. You have all been paid and I have done your job for you.
As everyone knows, I have requested, for a final time, that Buro Happold carry-out an as-built design review on the school and I have provided them with my evidence and the Scottish Government/Aberdeen City Council evidence and it is all trailing with this Email.
It is for the leadership of Buro Happold, the Institution of Civil Engineers, the Health and Safety Executive and Aberdeen City Council to communicate and ensure that this is investigated. It is not for any member of the public to do that and so can I ask you to take responsibility for ensuring the results are issued before the school re-opens. The Scottish Government should be in charge of this of course, but they cannot see beyond Visual Inspection Reports and so the Scottish Government cannot be relied upon.
George - I understand that this case may be the subject of a future Inquiry. That might not happen of course, but it might. That's why I keep writing to named individuals. The roots of this case are very deep of course and it will probably not all be uncovered, even at an Inquiry. But these letters will make life uncomfortable for those named.
ReplyDeleteAlways document and always in writing, people sadly in dealing with authority never click onto this and that is why so many people get hacked off re their complaints. Names, dates, places and times, all in writing, and archived.
DeletePlus, when you go to a meeting, take minutes and issue them on the day after the meeting. If they don't reply to you, they have accepted the minutes and that's the way it works. People (including Jackie Baillie!) don't generally know that either.
DeleteI copy everything to Audit Scotland. They won't do anything for me and I know that, but I have always reckoned that this school might not be able to be fixed and, if that were to be the case, then it would lead to an Inquiry of some sort.
Dear ICE,
ReplyDeleteI attach the Visual Inspection Reports by your members along with the the compilation of advice from American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) members.
There is a very obvious difference in their conclusions isn't there. That should not be the case and the conclusions of ICE members and ASCE members should be the same.
I cannot speak for the ASCE members but what I will say is that I am content that these are honest, professional opinions in compliance with the ASCE's professional ethical code.
My understanding is that you are responsible for auditing the output of your members work. I am asking you if these specific Visual Inspection Reports are in compliance with the ICE's ethical code. I do not believe that they are, but that decision is for you.
Then, once that is answered and we get Mr Stewart's response to the Scottish Government's letter of 30/9/16, then this matter can be settled very quickly.
I believe that the engineer responsible for the Scottish Government letter of 30/9/16 is another of your members.
George - When this is over, I'll meet up with you. You stay in Govan/Shawlands, somewhere like that? If so, then I know that area quite well. There is information that I don't want to write down here, but I will explain it to you when I see you. First of all though, you are due to be paid for your work and I am due to be paid for my work. So, I'll sort that out first.
ReplyDeleteGeorge - People ask: "Why did you do this; why did you put yourself and your wife through this?" The answer is: If you don't do it, you get blamed for it. It shouldn't take 9-years of course; in fact, it should have taken 1-8 weeks and I am expecting a range of other people to be blamed for that disgraceful situation.
ReplyDeleteSadly in life, people in positions of power rarely impress me. So many are a letdown and think politics is like Britain's Got Talent, were a few minutes in the limelight is better than 40 hrs min a week grafting away, public service is a dead concept to the woke generation.
DeleteDear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteI presume that my position has now been vindicated by the others?
I will be speaking to Universal Credit on again on Friday and I would very much like to have my case settled by then. That means loss of earnings to be paid and a replacement job provided.
All as highlighted in the Email trailing, from 12/8/23.
Dear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteI would not expect anyone to contact you.
Mr Stewart and Mr Mallett will decide if my evidence proves that the as-built design is stable or not and they will advise their client, Ms Scott. Ms Scott will then advise the Scottish Government.
It is for the Scottish Government and the Council to decide what to do about the school opening later this week, but it is for you to pursue payment of my lost earnings and replacement job.
The Scottish Government will not contact you and say: "We accept that our letters to Mr Dick and our meetings with Mr Dick were dishonest to him and misrepresented the advice of Buro Happold and we therefore accept liability for paying his loss of earnings and finding him a new job".
That's why I asked you to "re-engage" with them. Can you do that now, please? As I said at the weekend, we have run-out of time and so when I say "now", I mean "now".
Dear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteThis is the question that I asked you at the weekend: "Regarding your letter JB15209 of 6/4/22 to Mr Mallett and his reply of 7/722. Can you check that all of my evidence was sent to him, please? It seems that either my evidence wasn't sent, or it was sent and Mr Mallett hasn't looked at it? If we are in a position where some of the world's most respected engineers spend 6-weeks putting their opinions and guidance together and either you don't send it to Mr Mallett, or you do send it and Mr Mallett doesn't read it, then God help us all. The requisite information is trailing in this Email." Can you answer the question please? Was my evidence sent to Mr Mallett, or was it not sent?
Dear All,
We are in a position whereby the evidence that I provided in 2017, which came from worldwide ASCE expert geotechnical engineers, has proven to be genuine and verifiable. I will not repeat the conclusions and recommendations of that evidence, but they are unmistakable aren't they.
The Visual Inspection Reports which all of you have all relied upon instead, have proven to be bogus. Speaking as an engineer, I find that embarrassing and it is only a matter of time before it results in a tragedy. I am obviously blaming Ms Baillie and the Scottish Government for the situation I have been left in, but the rest of you have been complacent to allow this to happen, haven't you?
Dear Mr Sarwar,
ReplyDeleteWe are within a day or two of the school opening and, as I explain below, the engineering investigation has thus far been the most dishonest that I have witnessed anywhere in the world. However, we can leave that to those listed above to conclude from here. In fact, it has probably been done already. It is not complex and the ASCE have worked it out for them already!
I am copying this Email to Universal Credit and I am due to speak to them again on Friday. I want to have my situation agreed to an outcome before then. So, I am asking you to liaise with the Scottish Government and with Mr McAteer and respond to this Email with a full response either tomorrow, or on Thursday.
Ms Baillie has been dealing with this case for more than 7-years now. There is an obvious vested-interest there. Silence, holding replies and excuses for doing nothing are no longer acceptable and work needs to be done now and so can I leave that with you? It is all explained in the trailing Email.
Universal Credit are professionals and they know that myself and my wife should not be seeking their help and we are both anxious to remove ourselves from the position of having to ask for their help. Therefore, my advice to you is to remove Ms Baillie from any further involvement in this case.
Dear Mr Sarwar and Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteI attach the letters that I have received on this subject from the Scottish Government:
1. John Swinney, 30/12/17
2. John Swinney, 2/8/18
3. Hub 6/11/18
4. Jenny Laing, 25/1/19
5. Directorate of Learning, 11/5/21
6. Shirley-Ann Somerville, 17/3/22
7. Shona Robison, 19/5/23
Both letter 1 and letter 3 state that Buro Happold have no issues with this school (I somehow doubt if that is true) and letter 3 explains that Hub were directing Aberdeen City Council not to assist me. So, advising me to sort this out directly with the Council was never going to work.
The point is therefore made that I have had to carry-out this investigation unassisted by anyone in Scotland. Why all of these people have remained in a job when I have not, is inexplicable isn't it. Do these letters indicate some kind of malfeasance to you?
I will copy this through to Universal Credit later today and I repeat that I expect this to be resolved to an outcome before Friday and for me to be paid, and back working again, next week.
George - They block my Emails. It has been going-on for months. They cannot, for some reason, block Emails to Audit Scotland. We're in a poor state indeed when out law-makers resort to blocking Emails.
ReplyDeleteGeorge - The Numbers Game - I have around 40No, I think it's 44No world expert engineers on my side. On the other side is everyone from Holyrood, everyone from the Scottish civil-service and everyone from Harper MacLeod. That numbers around 40No too. So it's my 40No against their 40No. Their number includes the late Professor Rennie, John Swinney, Jackie Baillie, Shona Robison, Shirley-Ann Somerville etc. Get the picture? They're not expert engineers are they? But, according to Jackie Baillie, her 40No outweighs my 40No and in her world it probably does.
ReplyDeleteHence, I send everything through to Universal Credit because they have secure access and your Emails cannot be removed. I do know that sending anything through to Universal Credit worries them greatly and so I send everything through to them.
I reckon that I've won already They haven't even put up a fight. I reckon tampering with private Emails is probably against the law, isn't it? That's Emails to HSE and Protect - all blocked today.
George - I forgot to mention Aberdeen City Council and Hub; they're all in with Jackie Baillie too and so they will have 40No easily. Sadly though, none of them appear to know what they are talking about but I know, because Jackie has told me many times now, that they don't agree with me.
ReplyDeleteSo, if you assume that they earn on average £80k per annum, for nine years, that gives you a total of £29m. My experts had it all worked-out within 6-weeks free of charge. If the school cannot be fixed, you can add-on another £30m. So, almost £60m wasted. If they had listened to me 9-years ago it would have cost them nothing.
No one wants to lead anymore, fear of loss, and doing the right thing is in their minds. No one wants to rock the boat in case a cabal target them and their career and mortgages are threatened.
DeleteJackie Baillie said to everyone; "It doesn't matter what Buro Happold think; the Scottish Government and Aberdeen City Council have checked this school and they say it is OK". I have said: "They are not competent and are not authorized to check anything; only Buro Happold is". So, it's what you say alright, but it's vested interests as well.
DeleteDear Mr Sarwar and Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteAs you both know, I have asked for this case to be concluded by close of business today (Thursday) and responsibility for doing that lies with Ms Baillie.
The case is answered when Buro Happold's Mr Stewart responds to the Email that I sent him (trailing) on 7/8/23. If Mr Stewart does not respond when asked, then he may be blamed personally for any future structural deformation or collapse of the school, or failure of the land. I would therefore expect him to provide a very clear answer.
He will respond to Ms Scott of Aberdeen City Council and Ms Scott will communicate with all of the other parties that are involved.
Mr Stewart will either state that the as-built design change that I explain is acceptable, or he will state that it is not acceptable. If he states that it is not acceptable, as I have done since 2014, then I will expect all of my financial losses to be paid and a new job provided by the Scottish Government and I have asked for that to be done immediately.
I am copying this to Universal Credit and I will be speaking to them as usual on Friday. I have told them that I should have a solution by then and I set-out in the paragraph immediately above the only solution that I will accept.
As you all know, this case was solved largely due to the assistance of a large number of expert members of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and how they can be so effective in a situation like this and the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) are so ineffective, is something that I find absolutely astounding, embarrassing really and I look upon this as 9-years of my life needlessly wasted.
Finally, the decision as to whether the design change is compliant "safe", or non-compliant "unsafe", is for Mr Stewart alone. It is not for anyone at the Scottish Government, or Aberdeen City Council. As you can all tell from the letters I sent earlier today, neither the Scottish Government nor Aberdeen City Council have any concept of what they are talking about here and they will inevitably end-up getting people killed.
George - the school either opens, or doesn't open, on Tuesday. Who knows? I asked Buro Happold to check it 2-weeks ago and Jackie Baillie can back to me within an hour (that's the fastest she has ever responded) and said: "All of us at the Scottish Government and Aberdeen City Council think this school is fine....but we're not engineers". That made me think that they all know it is not fine. But, she is undoubtedly putting pressure on Buro Happold to say nothing.
ReplyDeleteSo, basically, if the school doesn't open on Tuesday then the politicians and councillors will be blamed and if it does open and then cracks and has to be replaced with a new school on a different site, Buro Happold will be blamed. It's not as easy to predict as I am making it out to be of course, but the precedent cases that I am aware of ended like this.
The way it works is that specific named people will be blamed and they will all be Directors. I can only say that if I were Buro Happold I would be very, very straight with everyone. Otherwise, they have a lot to lose, as has the Institution of Civil Engineers.
However, we're just about finished now and so we just wait.
Dear Mr Sarwar and Ms Baillie,
ReplyDelete1. I spoke to Universal Credit yesterday. Their motivation is getting me back into work. There is a possible solution and I have explained it to them and to Mr McAteer. Parliamentary assistance will be required from my MSP and I am asking you to provide that assistance, please?
2. The school is due to reopen early next week. As you state below, the decision to re-open is for MSP's and Councillors alone and that is what has happened in previous years. A specific question has been raised though regarding the stability of the school and the land. It has been explained very clearly and reiterated many times so that "plausible deniability" is unlikely to preclude anyone copied into this Email from accountability in the end. So, the decision whether the school and the land are safe, lies with the engineers of Buro Happold and they require to decide first, before the MSP's and Councillors can make their executive decision. I presume that Buro Happold's decision has already been made and that you have all seen it?
George - I don't think I have ever sent you this Email which was the Email that started this off. It was dated 13/9/14, so very nearly 9-years ago. Believe it or not, I have had to repeat this information 1500No times.
ReplyDeleteJackie Baillie is an expert dissembler. You send something to Jackie, it's urgent and you say that, but Jackie's "too busy", or she says "do it yourself", or "but no-one agrees with you", or "not me". So, that's how weeks turn into months and months turn into years. How many times have you read the detail undernoted now? It's been on constant repetition, on a constant loop, since 2014.
Plausible deniability is when the opposition gather together and don't elect a leader and so you are fighting against an amorphous opponent who you cannot beat. However, criminal law is on my side and if they open the school and it cracks, and that is inevitable, then plausible deniability stops at that point and individuals will be named and may be charged under criminal law.
If you cast your mind back to Professor Rennie. His last words to me were; "I dealt with your groundless complaint years ago." So, between Jackie Baillie and Professor Rennie - these are the people at the leading edge of making sure that nothing gets done and no-one gets blamed. Professor Rennie's dead now of course but Jackie Baillie has a damehood and she and all the others are getting paid and I am not getting paid. If they do anything now, that situation might be reversed and so Jackie Baillie's preferred solution is to do nothing.
"Bruce,
Ogilvie's final letter to me was dated 10th September. These photographs were taken on 11th September and show that the process of subsidence has already started. The cracks in the soil in then foreground of each photograph mark the edge of the 5m deep trench which was excavated in the search for contamination. No contamination was found, but the soils within these trenches will now be subject to 'inundation, soil collapse and subsidence'. What you are seeing now will worsen during the winter months when the water table level rises and the moisture content of the surface soils increase. The consistence of the soils within the trenches will soften to the extent that, in places, the soils will have the consistency of a slurry. It is therefore dangerous and it should be recognised, discussed and recorded now. These photographs will allow this process to get started.
As the letters show, I have discussed this over numerous iterations with Ogilvie's senior management. There is no recognition from them, either in writing or verbally, that there is a problem and so they have no intention of putting any remedial actions into place. Ogilvie's Construction Director appears to have an entrenched view that subsidence will not occur. Experience shows that in situations like this either nothing is done by the contractor, or some reluctant and half-hearted remedial work is done at the last minute which will not solve the problem.
Aberdeen City Council's geotechnical advisers are Fairhurst and Partners. They will understand what has happened and they will be able provide independent advice to Aberdeen City Council.
From my personal point of view, I wanted to resolve this as an employee of Ogilvie and I wanted to finish the project and ensure that it was successful. 'Whistleblowing' is not therefore something that I chose to do, but something that I have been forced into doing. How else can I deal with an employer like Ogilvie? Surely employees should be able to raise concerns about engineering especially on government funded projects without fear of being of being terminated on the fabricated grounds of 'poor communication skills'."
Dear Mr Sarwar and Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteI presume that Buro Happold's design review has been delivered and that all interested parties have read it? I presume that it vindicates my position and establishes that the Scottish Government ministers have been entirely wrong?
That being the case, I discussed with Universal Credit on Friday that I be removed from this case, paid what I am owed by the Scottish Government and returned to work and I asked you to do that for me at the weekend.
Can you advise me what you are doing on this today please? Experience shows the necessity to send multiple, repetitive Emails to you or else nothing gets done and so please respond and that will prevent everyone's time from being wasted.
Dear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteYou have a habit of dissembling straighforward requests and sending them back to me and that helps no-one. I have spent the best part of 9-years unemployed, mainly because of your lack of attention to this case and that is pretty shameful, frankly.
If you recall, you told me that you were overseas and were too busy. I replied that you were actually in Rutherglen (Glasgow) campaigning for a by-election and you replied that I should find another MSP to represent me in this case.
I therefore contacted Mr Sarwar and he advised that only you could work on this case. So, I am asking you again to just do your job.
Buro Happold sent their design review to their client, Aberdeen City Council (ACC) and it is for ACC to send it to the other interested parties. That will not include you and so that explains why you have not seen it. I presume the others have seen it?
If the school has been certified as safe over the past 7-years based upon the information that I have seen, then that may be a situation that breaches criminal law. You can let the others deal with that - that's 3No ministers and a senior civil-servant!
I sent you an Email this morning and it was very clear. I want to be paid my losses by the Scottish Government and returned to work and so just deal with that and nothing else, please.
Dear Mr Sarwar,
ReplyDeleteA case which began in 2014 and which now has to be resolved to an outcome within hours and Ms Baillie recuses herself again.
We are serious professionals and the two crucial points at issue are:
1. Professional advice from Buro Happold should be sought if the Council is considering opening the school to the public before their as-built design review is issued.
2. Payment of my loss of earnings and provision of a job was refused by Ms Baillie on the grounds that the Scottish Government had no locus. I provided evidence by way of meeting minutes and letters that the locus exists and I have asked, several times, for that decision to be reversed.
Can either you or Ms Baillie get back to me tomorrow on this, please?
George - That's my access to Emails blocked again. This happens from time to time when the pressure increases. I'll contact Audit Scotland in the morning. Would this have happened 20-years ago in Scotland? 10-years ago even?
ReplyDeleteUnder the current government which promised transparency and to be open, this commitment was just window dressing.
DeleteDear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteI have reported interference with my Email account to Universal Credit already and I will report it to Protect and to Audit Scotland in the morning. In my view, this may be unlawful, especially under the current circumstances, and I can only say that I have not witnessed this anywhere else in the world. It has happened several times here, hasn't it?
Neither of us wish to prolong this dialogue longer than is necessary but the two points that require to be answered are:
1. Advice from the Buro Happold team should be sought if the Council is proposing to open the school tomorrow. By law, specifically the Health and Safety at Work Act, that advice should be made available to all of the teachers at the school, by the Council themselves. My question was asked on 7/8/23 and is trailing and it is for Buro Happold's Ian Stewart to answer this.
2. Payment of my lost earnings and provision of a replacement job was refused on the grounds that The Scottish Government had no locus. I provided evidence of a locus by way of meeting minutes, letters and the witness of an Advocate lawyer and I have asked for that decision to be reversed.
Can you get back to me tomorrow on the latter point please?
Dear Sybille and Audit Scotland,
ReplyDeleteI wish to report that my Email account was accessed again yesterday. This has happened before and I believe that it is probably unlawful? I notice that it is working normally again today.
The problem I had the previous time was that sent Emails were disappearing from my sent items box so that I had no record of ever having sent them. I started copying everything through to my wife's Email and so that has now stopped.
This time, I was unable to send anything to anyone although, as I say, it is not happening just now.
I have reported it already to Universal Credit and I am reporting it to you.
If I have been wrong for all of these years then it is perhaps understandable that people are tired of dealing with this and hearing about it but if I have been right, then this constant intimidation is unacceptable and, as I say, probably unlawful.
Dear Sybille and Audit Scotland,
ReplyDeleteI will mention a final point that just crossed my mind:
There must be about 50 or 60 people involved in this investigation just now. A lot of them are lawyers from Harper MacLeod, plenty of civil-servants of one type or another, parliamentarians and councillors and various construction people, a few of whom I know.
All that you need is one contractually "authorized" geotechnical engineer and that allows this to be resolved to an outcome. Then, once that is done, Harper MacLeod can take over from there and decide who pays.
That's what I did with the ASCE in 2017.
What I would expect to happen is Hugh Mallett and Ian Stewart presents their findings to Aberdeen City Council and Aberdeen City Council come to a decision regarding the school opening jointly with the Scottish Government.
Does that make sense? That's the way contracts usually work.
Dear All,
ReplyDeleteThe school has presumably now re-opened. My reading of that situation is that Buro Happold have either decided that the school is compliant and safe, or they have decided that it is non-compliant and unsafe, but the Council has decided to open it anyway. It is either one or the other, isn't it?
The two scenarios are entirely different of course and it is essential that those relying upon this building every day are aware are are not being kept in the dark and that is premise under which the Health and Safety at Work Act has been respected in the UK for many decades now.
So, it is for the Scottish Government to ensure that Aberdeen City Council have done this?
Dear Ms Baillie and Audit Scotland,
My Emails are being accessed again this morning and are only being sent to yourselves and Natalie at Beltrami. I reported this situation yesterday and so can I ask the what should be done about it? If the ICE, HSE, Protect, Buro Happold and the constituency MSP are not being informed at this point then that is not acceptable, is it?
I will leave it to Audit Scotland to determine if this information should be sent-on to the other parties that are involved (to all those cc'd) and I will copy this Email to Universal Credit on their secure IT system within the next hour.
No-one else is involved in ensuring that I am properly paid and returned to work and that has been explained to you many times. Universal Credit understand that whistle-blowing should be over within less than 8-weeks and when it extends to 9-years, as it has in this case, that inevitably causes needless hardship to those that should be protected and that is the way it works, worldwide.
So, I am asking you to conclude this for me now, please.
Dear All,
ReplyDeleteI notice that my Email account has been "unblocked" and so you may have seen the trailing Email already and you may not, but it is self explanatory.
I keep two members of the Press informed and I notice that they remain blocked and so can I request that block is removed now and my private account is not accessed in this way again?
I understand what is alleged to have caused of the failure of this whistle-blowing case. Contractors sometimes make mistakes and if you are allowing engineers to be sacked and blacklisted for identifying those mistakes then the public reaction to that will be entirely negative.
As you can see, I have asked Ms Baillie to ensure the immediate end to my involvement in this case and I expect to be working again on Monday.
George - For me to be working again on Monday, I will have to be paid on Friday. That means that everyone gets paid for their work and that includes yourself.
ReplyDeleteDear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteI am due to speak to Universal Credit again tomorrow. They are no doubt disappointed, as I am, that my regular Emails are not being answered.
No-one doubts that I should be vindicated and that I should be receiving your help to get settled and re-started and so can you explain when that is going to happen?
My Email account is working again, including to journalists. I will speak to them on the lack of respect shown to whistle-blowers in Scotland. The specifics of Brimmond School though are best left to the teachers?
Dear All,
ReplyDeleteThe following was discussed a short time ago with Universal Credit:
1. Once my Email to Mr Stewart of 7/8/23 (trailing below in red text) is answered and presented to all interested parties, the safety (or lack thereof) of Brimmond School and the land surrounding it will be settled authoritatively and finally. That Email was sent almost 3-weeks ago and so the answer should be available now. That will determine whether the school should be open to the public and I presume that's all that anyone wants to know.
2. If Mr Stewart agrees with me, then the Scottish Government and Aberdeen City Council's joint position which is explained in their letters sent to you on 17/8/23 (also trailing below in red text) is incorrect, isn't it? Does "incorrect" mean "unlawful" in this situation? If the answer to that is "yes", than that would be pretty shameful. I have been advised to report this case to Police Scotland several times over the years and I suspect it was for that reason.
Dear Ms Baillie and Mr Sarwar,
We can leave the safety of Brimmond School to be determined by the others now. They can work to their own timeline and it has nothing to do with us. You will (probably) not be issued with Buro Happold's findings and neither will I and we should accept that.
I explained to Universal Credit that if my unemployment is due to malfeasance by Scottish Government ministers, then the Scottish Government are due to pay my losses and return me to work. I have offered to work in this country, or overseas, and I have no preference. I see this as being the work of my constituency MSP to pursue this on my behalf. Is that accepted?
Can either Ms Baillie or Mr Sarwar get back to me today and explain to me what you are doing to resolve this? It looks to me as though I have had to investigate everything single-handedly and that is really disappointing.
Dear Ms Baillie and Mr Sarwar,
ReplyDeleteI have just had another call from Universal Credit and the way they, and I, are looking at this just now is that my livelihood is dependent upon whether you decide to act on my behalf, or not act on my behalf. You have both had a long time to make your minds-up and I am asking you to decide what you are doing today.
So, as I said earlier, if one of you can call me or Email me to explain what it is you propose to do, that would be most helpful.
As I'm sure you will appreciate, this is a most unusual case for them and they are taking it very seriously.
George - No response from either Ms Baillie or Mr Sarwar and so I reported it to Police Scotland.
ReplyDeleteDear Mr Sarwar and Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteI have decided to report this case to Police Scotland. I have been advised to do it several times over the years and so I reported it a couple of hours ago. The potential crime that I am reporting is that of "reckless certification" of the school.
I have asked Police Scotland to review the following evidence:
1. My evidence, which is provided by 44No expert members of the ASCE.
2. The Scottish Government/Aberdeen City Council evidence, which are 5No visual inspection reports.
3. Buro Happold's evidence by Ian Stewart/Hugh Mallett, which is their response to the Email of 7/8/23, trailing.
As you all know, I believe that the seeds have been set for a future collapse to occur at this school and that a proper investigation of all of the evidence should take place now, before it's too late.
Obviously, Buro Happold's evidence will be deciding evidence and it is crucial that this sees the light of day and is not hidden.
Ms Baillie is my MSP but is refusing to communicate at this most crucial time. Can you advise me what you propose to do about that, please? It is for you to decide upon who takes her place but if, whoever it is, communicates and answers the questions that are asked, we ought to get this case concluded effortlessly from here.
I am copying this Email to Universal Credit.
Dear Ms Baillie,
ReplyDeleteI will explain once again the way it works:
When the Buro Happold opinion is issued to Aberdeen City Council, it will become apparent, to everyone, that the Scottish Government and Aberdeen City Council have been lying and I have been truthful. It's just as well that I have been able to persist for as long as I have, or we would never have reached this outcome and lives could easily have been lost as a result of that.
It is a putrid situation and it will be for Police Scotland to investigate whether criminality has been involved at any stage. For example, in the Visual Inspection Reports that some of you have relied upon. But, that decision is for them.
I will then expect you to request from the Scottish Government that they pay my loss of earnings and provide me with another job. That gets done after the Buro Happold opinion is issued, not before. The Buro Happold opinion should already have been issued (?) and so I am asking you to do that, now.
Finally, I attach your letter of 2/8/18 to Councillor Jenny Laing of Aberdeen City Council and her (much delayed) reply to you of 25/1/19 which sets-out the fairly alarming information which was reported by many world experts at the time. Perhaps if both of you had taken it seriously back then, this could have been avoided?