Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
On the 31 st July 2023, I did a blog post called ‘political death looms in Rutherglen’, my contention was that the by-election on paper see... -
When former Nicola Sturgeon was cornered like a rat by the Holyrood press pack, you could see in her demeanor that she extremely uncomfortab...
When this is finished, and that should be soon, I'll arrange to meet-up with you. It's been a long battle, hasn't it and I am due to buy you your dinner somewhere. I think you live somewhere around Govan and if that is the case, then I know that area quite well and used to stay there myself. You have been working on this since 2018 and I have been working on it since 2014. What a feckin waste of time it has all been. Does Shawlands suit you? Let me know. We will wait until we get paid first.
ReplyDeleteDear All,
ReplyDeleteEngineer Prakash called yesterday to say that he is working on the submission and that it will be submitted later today. I have asked him to work as "the administrator" of the document and that is all. He is based in Eastern KSA and the ASCE experts will respond to him, I will respond to them and all of that information will be sent back to Engineer Prakash so that he can up-date the document on the system. Each expert who visits the site will have access to the latest opinion, be that from experts or from myself. That's the way it works and my opinion is constantly peer reviewed, not by Shona Robison, but by expert engineers working from all over the world.
He is not changing anything from the text you have all read and is trailing.
I attach "Minutes of Site Technical Meeting 8" of 8/7/14, which took place the day before I left for annual vacation and you will notice that I spent a great deal of time discussing the "Hugh Mallett Report on Contamination". I clearly wanted to implement Mr Mallett's recommendations and Ogilvie Construction proceeded to do exactly the opposite whilst I was away and hence the seeds of disaster were set and when I returned two weeks later and complained about this, I was terminated and my letter of 5/8/14, also attached, was the letter I sent to Ogilvie Construction in response to my termination. As you can see, the contents of the letter are entirely consistent with the position that I am explaining to all of you now and that position has remained unchanged for the past 10-years.
I also attach, and for the umpteenth time, the previous version of this document and this is it will look and how it will be presented to all of you in the end. That version took 6-weeks from start to finish.
It is crucial that this information is handled by an authoritative professional on your side. Can I suggest Peter Reekie of Scottish Futures Trust as he has been such a stubborn roadblock during the past 10-years? Engineer Prakash will send the updated document to me every day, or two days as he wishes, and I will forward it to all of you. You can contact any of the experts for additional guidance, they will all be named and their contact details provided and I would encourage you to do that, even if it is only to demonstrate how ethical engineering in the rest of the world works. It is so staggeringly simple nowadays.
The way this ends is that a consensus view will start to become clear. That happened the last time of course and the consensus view was covered-up and that, frankly, would be considered as a breech of criminal law in most jurisdictions. I presume that, with far more people being involved this time, that will not happen again. Once the consensus view is agreed by your side, whether that be by Mr Reekie or whoever else you appoint to represent you, a recommendation can be made to Ms Robison and she can announce that Brimmond School is either safe, or unsafe and that will be the end of the matter.
ReplyDeleteMy view is that responsibility can be laid at the door of Ogilvie Construction and Harper MacLeod, but that decision is for all of you. The experts may come back to us and say: "There is nothing wrong with this building", but that is not what they said in 2017.
Dear Natalie,
Mr McAteer is either waiting for the school to collapse, or he is waiting for an "epiphany moment" before he picks up the phone to call me. If he is waiting for an epiphany moment, then this might be it?
Let me explain what angers me most about this: Engineer Prakash and the ASCE are doing now, and for a second time, what I asked and paid Harper MacLeod and Fairhurst to do for me in 13/9/14 and the trailing Email, from 13/9/16 explains that. Therefore, what I asked them to do was either not done, or it was done was covered-up. Either way, it clearly amounts to "professional misconduct" and the full consequences of that are now in plain view for all to see.
I find this shameful for Scotland and this is the reason that I am insisting that Engineer Prakash, the ASCE, and the three others that I have identified are properly paid, by the Scottish Government, for their work. That situation is not going to change and so accept it, please.
It may be the case that the experts do not agree with me and for the next few days no-one knows what they are going to say, but if they do agree then this amounts to a public relations nightmare, doesn't?
Raghu,
ReplyDeleteI was taking the dog for a walk and that's why no-one answered.
Don't include the reports by Fairhurst and don't include the location either.
The title:
"I RECKON THE 5M DEEP EXCAVATION BELOW THE WATER TABLE CAUSED THE PROBLEM. IS THERE A SOLUTION AT THIS STAGE? – GEOTECHNICAL EXPERT COMMENTS SOLICITED - Part 2
DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM"
That version looks better to me. I think if we keep it simple this time with the text and the photographs, that will be more effective. I am making the analogy with Surfside in Florida and the text and the photographs are all I need to do that and they will either agree or disagree with me.
I am including Natalie in my reply to you because you are an old work colleague of mine and all the rest of it, but no-one expects engineering of this quality to be provided free and my expectation is, and I have repeated it to Natalie many times, that you will be well paid for this, along with the others.
Can you make the photographs as big as possible this time?
If you can post that up and make it live and let me know when you have done that. Natalie is working on my behalf and she will advise when enough is enough. I'm hoping that Dr Thomas responds again. I expect him to say: "Do you clowns never listen?"
That sounds fabulous Raghu and thank you for that.
ReplyDeleteAs before, don't make any comments yourself and leave that to me.
Send the updated document to me every day, every second day, something like that and I will send it to the others.
George - I think this will be all-over soon. It will be many of the world's most distinguished engineers versus Shona Robison. What a tragedy for Scotland and Scottish engineering. Raghu was saying that it goes live tomorrow and the responses will start coming-in soon after.
ReplyDeleteI think the problem with people like Robison is an inability to fix problems, even her own PR had a problem with her opening her mouth and waffling on. A failure to understand their brief or surround themselves with people who can reduce a problem to a nuts and bolts explanation, and come up with a ready made solution that she can blurt out.
DeleteI know a Lebanese family and I have no problems with their standpoint just now. Interestingly, this goes back generations and they blame a Scotsman, Balfour, for it. I am not a Celtic supporter but I understand the Green Brigade and their determination to support the underdog no matter what it means for their club. So, no problems with any of that. What I do have a problem with is Sarwar and Yousaf and the amount of time they are spending and being allowed to spend on this subject. My guess is that Netanyahu will pay no attention to the Green Brigade and will pay even less attention to Sarwar and Yousaf. So, find something useful to do Sarwar and Yousaf, or else piss-off out of our way.
ReplyDeleteBoth are playing to their own audiences and virtue signalling.
DeleteGeorge - The first expert opinion has arrived. I'm expecting one or two per day from now on. I'm calm enough, but I'll bet the anxiety levels are rising elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteDear All
ReplyDeleteI understand that the first expert opinion arrived earlier.
In 2017, I agreed with all of the expert opinions and I will do so again this time. It is for you to elect someone to speak on your behalf and I suggested Peter Reekie of Scottish Future Trust?
Then, and if there is alignment between all of the other parties that are involved, all of you in other words, then we will have understood the problem and that allows a solution to be found.
We are at the business end now and these are respected figures in world engineering. Ms Robison cannot answer them and they can only be answered, professionally, by the best engineers you have.
I am sure we can all agree that Engineer Prakash and the ASCE have both done a great job in getting this submission up and running so quickly for us.
Dear All,
ReplyDeleteI received the attachment from Engineer Prakash an hour ago. I think we can all agree that this is great work from an honest professional who, like me, has been trying to help.
Receiving 5No responses in the first day is remarkable and we have our first Professor of Engineering.
Already there is a consistency of response, isn't there? That will get more and more pointed, towards a cause and effect, as time goes-on and the number of respondents increase. "How much longer is this building going to last?"
I saved your embarrassment by not including the "Visual Inspection Reports" by Fairhurst, but if this is not resolved for myself and the others within the next few days, I will post that up for all to see.
I cannot be any clearer with you all. I would therefore appreciate a phone call today from Mr McAteer.
Raghu,
ReplyDeleteMy comments are attached and so can you update it on the ASCE/Linkedin system when you have time please?
My strategy is clear from the earlier Email and I have left the door open to posting-up the Visual Inspection Reports by Fairhurst.
Once again let me say that this is remarkable and an exemplar of expert engineering, provided worldwide and free of charge, in the internet age.
George - We are now waiting. The submission to the ASCE is a winner. Very few submissions can show a "cause" and an "effect" as clearly as this submission has. Ms Baillie has been removed and that is great news. Professor H who is English and a Professor of Engineering, against Professor R who was Scottish and a Professor of Law. The difference in ethical standards between the two is astounding. Professors of Engineering are academics and educators and they teach students formulas, explain formulas to them, teach them design standards and all the rest of it. Here, they have an example of what happens when you don't apply the rules. Read the explanation and look at the photographs and then read the explanation again. It's probably the best example of a needless foul-up they will ever see. Brought to us by the Scottish Parliament.
ReplyDeleteHopefully this is the progress towards a resolution.
DeleteDear Ms Raphael,
ReplyDeleteI wonder if you could clarify something for myself and Engineer Prakash, who is currently assisting me from KSA. You are no doubt aware of the ASCE/Linkedin submission (attached) which is running at the moment and which received 5No responses within less than a day of going live. The purpose of the submission is to give expert engineers worldwide the opportunity to comment on this case.
The submission is proving so popular because there is a "cause" and there is an "effect". The cause is explained in the text and the effect is explained by the photographs. Not many submissions are able to do this so succinctly and, for that reason, it will be answered enthusiastically and we are already seeing that. Ms Baillie has been complaining for eight-years that she is "not an engineer". That is accepted of course, but now we have opened the matter up to be discussed by hundreds of engineers.
The way the ASCE/Linkedin submissions work is that they have to be left to run their course. They have to be maintained constantly during the course of the submission, but I am doing that. Essentially, I have provided the "Description of the Problem" and the photographs, the ASCE members are providing their personal opinions and I am answering them.
If I have been wrong or if I have been exaggerating, the ASCE engineers will detect that - of course they will. I have nevertheless volunteered to undergo this very public examination in "real-time" and so there are no hiding places for me and there are no hiding places for the Scottish Government. Is it in the public interest that this is allowed to run its course? Yes, it is and anyone who is reticent about the veracity of their case would not submit to this sort of intense examination. I have nevertheless done so.
When Engineer Prakash and I submitted Part 1, in 2017, it ran continuously for 6-weeks. This time, I would expect it to run for a fraction of that time and after 1-day we are getting pretty close to a definitive answer. My experience of the Scottish Government over the years has been that they are loathe to submit to any kind of public scrutiny and although this is essentially scrutiny of me, it is also scrutiny of them and if I am found to be correct, that will amount to a public relations crisis for them and there is no doubt about that.
I am satisfied that what myself, Engineer Prakash and the ASCE members are doing is ethical. For his benefit however, are you able to clarify that what he is doing just now is legal with respect to Scottish law? My own opinion, for what it's worth, is that we are extraordinarily fortunate, all of us, to be receiving this outstanding quality of assistance and I would expect everyone copied into this Email to be grateful for, and respectful of, the contribution which is currently being made by him.
Unless there is some kind of impediment that stops us, can I suggest that Engineer Prakash is given express permission to re-start the ASCE/Linkedin submission? I am aware that you cannot do that personally, and that has to come from Scottish Government ministers, but unless there is a good reason to stop this, then it should be allowed to continue in the public interest?
You never know, I may be right?
I suspect am right.
Dear Sybille,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your reply. If you are frustrated, then how do you think I feel? You are restricted in what you can say and do. Bob explained that and I am only asking for your advice.
The question was: If Part 1 was allowed to go ahead, why is Part 2 being stopped all of a sudden and who is stopping it? With respect, you have been paid for the past 10-years and I have not and I therefore have a very pointed interest in getting this finished now.
The submission will see that it is solved within days and I think we all know what the answer is going to be and I alluded to it earlier and that is no doubt why it has been stopped.
I will not correspond with you again, as you wish.
Dear ICE,
Please respond in the morning as I must let Engineer Prakash know. It's Visual Inspection Reports by Fairhurst, versus the experts of the ASCE. It's either one, or the other. This is engineering "design review" and you are in charge of setting standards and seeing that is done properly by your members.
Copy-in everyone as Ms Raphael has done so that we are all aware of the ICE's position. All engineers must be able to proceed with confidence as this is independent design review work that should be allowed in the public interest. I can say that I have never before encountered this being stopped by the Government of any country.
Dear ICE,
ReplyDeleteAs you can see, this is becoming fractious and no-wonder.
Can I suggest that the Visual Inspection Reports by your members Fairhurst are withdrawn? They are attached. We cannot allow years of stasis to be caused by information that any engineer in the world can see is fraudulent.
Finally, Engineer Prakash is working within the ASCE's ethical code. Is he working within the ICE's ethical code and should the ASCE's information be released here? It is Scottish engineering that we are talking about and so it is your call.
Dear Sir/Madam,
ReplyDeleteI am having Emails removed again. Everything sent from 17.2.24 until now has been removed. I am obviously trying to end this case and I am doing that by sending independent opinions from world experts. Police Scotland advised that was what was needed in 11/9/23 and I am now doing that. The process is not being helped by this constant removal of data.
Let me know what you advise I do about this please.