:00:09. > :00:13.away with it as a result. Thank you Tonight on Newsnight Scotland:
:00:13. > :00:16.Democracy Aberdeen style. Aberdeen City Council vote to stop
:00:16. > :00:19.a garden project despite the fact the people of the city approved it
:00:19. > :00:25.in a referendum. What's the point of these supposed exercises in
:00:25. > :00:28.democracy if politicians just ignore them?
:00:29. > :00:33.And I'll be asking the man who's come up with an alternative to Alex
:00:33. > :00:37.Salmond's referendum question quite what the point of this exercise was.
:00:37. > :00:41.Good evening. They're the plans that divided a city and involved a
:00:42. > :00:43.donation of �50 million from one of Scotland's richest men. Today the
:00:44. > :00:47.long-running debate behind the transformation of Aberdeen's Union
:00:47. > :00:49.Terrace Gardens took another - seemingly terminal - twist.
:00:49. > :00:59.Councillors overturned the decision of a referendum and effectively
:00:59. > :01:07.
:01:07. > :01:11.killed off the �140 million City # Did you go to Aberdeen?
:01:11. > :01:16.# Tell me what you found # To some, it's the green heart of
:01:16. > :01:21.the granite city, deserving protection. To others it's
:01:21. > :01:25.neglected and underused in need of transformation.
:01:25. > :01:29.Sir Ian Wood, the Aberdeen oil and gas multi-multi-millionaire had a
:01:29. > :01:32.vision. This will not go ahead unless they want this to happen.
:01:32. > :01:42.Frankly, it's a project of someone who was born and brought up in
:01:42. > :01:48.Aberdeen. Sir Ian wanted the gardens raised to street level. He
:01:48. > :01:52.pledged �50 million of his own money. This design, the Granite Web,
:01:52. > :01:55.won an international competition judged by a jury including Sir Ian.
:01:55. > :02:00.It wasn't, as it later emerged, the public's favourite. To be allowed
:02:00. > :02:03.to raise the rest of the �140 million project cost through a
:02:03. > :02:07.special loan known as tax incremental financing, the Scottish
:02:07. > :02:11.Government demanded a show of public support.
:02:11. > :02:15.A referendum was held. Sir Ian paid for most of it. Labour councilors
:02:15. > :02:18.were against the referendum and the project, saying the figures didn't
:02:18. > :02:23.add up. Sir Ian pledged to abide by the result. The debate was
:02:23. > :02:28.sometimes very heated. It's a proud park in a great city.
:02:28. > :02:36.Do not destroy it. APPLAUSE
:02:36. > :02:39.The percentage poll was 52%. Granite Web design won the day with
:02:39. > :02:43.Aberdeen's residents and a business case was prepared to submit to
:02:43. > :02:48.Ministers, but then something happened. Labour unexpectedly ended
:02:48. > :02:51.up with most councilors on the city council after May's local elections.
:02:51. > :02:56.They campaigned to scrap the City Garden Project. Members of the
:02:56. > :03:01.council, Lord Provost. And so today they did - at the same time
:03:01. > :03:05.thinking Sir Ian Wood very much for his generous offer. We've made a
:03:05. > :03:09.difficult decision, as I say. I think that everybody - I described
:03:10. > :03:13.earlier the gesture from Sir Ian Wood as the most gracious in my
:03:13. > :03:17.lifetime, but we have to make some difficult decisions for the city. I
:03:17. > :03:21.mean, I think there will be a rebuilding process in relationships.
:03:21. > :03:28.I think it sends out a horrendous signal to the north-east that we've
:03:28. > :03:31.no courage here. We've no vision. There is no leadership in the
:03:31. > :03:35.council. We've spent the last seven or eight years developing long-term
:03:35. > :03:41.plans for this region, but at the point of getting a lot of these
:03:41. > :03:46.things off the ground, today's decision, in my mind, sets us back
:03:46. > :03:50.ten, 15 years. Sir Ian withdrew his �50 million immediately, while
:03:50. > :03:59.saying he was dismayed and disappointed. He added that the
:03:59. > :04:02.opinions of citizens in Aberdeen Well, live in Aberdeen at the
:04:02. > :04:07.council headquarters, we have the present Labour leader of the
:04:07. > :04:10.council, Barney Crockett, who you saw in the film there, and the
:04:10. > :04:13.former leader of the city council, the SNP's Callum McCaig. Barney
:04:13. > :04:18.Crockett, what's the point of having a referendum if you then
:04:18. > :04:21.completely ignore the results? I think, you know, your report
:04:21. > :04:25.mentioned that the Labour Party were very much opposed to a
:04:25. > :04:28.referendum as a way of deciding a non-constitutional issue. I think
:04:28. > :04:33.it's very important that councillors have to be seen to take
:04:33. > :04:37.the responsibility because, you know, the buck eventually stops
:04:37. > :04:40.with the council, the council, and through them eventually the
:04:40. > :04:44.taxpayers have to take the bill at the end, and I think that
:04:44. > :04:50.councillors have to stand up and be counted. Right. So your message to
:04:50. > :04:54.the voters of Aberdeen is, we don't give a hoot what you think? No, not
:04:54. > :04:58.at all. I think that you know, the election - we always said the
:04:58. > :05:01.elections that should count in a democracy are the elections for the
:05:01. > :05:05.city council and, you know, we've stuck by that. We have stuck by
:05:05. > :05:08.what we put to the people. I think going back - you know, the
:05:08. > :05:13.referendum - I think local democracy is under attack on many
:05:13. > :05:17.fronts, and I think that you know, the cities in Scotland will be very
:05:17. > :05:21.important to its economic future, and they have to... The local
:05:21. > :05:26.democracy, surely, is under attack above all by you when you have
:05:26. > :05:31.completely ignored the result of a perfectly well-conducted referendum
:05:31. > :05:34.on precisely this issue. Well, I think the referendum was well
:05:34. > :05:37.conducted technically, but there was an enormous disparity in the
:05:37. > :05:45.money that could be spent on advertising, and, you know, the
:05:45. > :05:48.person who administered the election did compare it to the
:05:48. > :05:51.super-park-style elections in America where gigantic spending on
:05:52. > :05:59.advertising can influence the outcomes. Callum McCaig, what do
:05:59. > :06:05.you make of this? What do you make of this? I think it's - I think the
:06:05. > :06:11.results day is a sad day for Aberdeen. It's a sad day
:06:11. > :06:16.economically for the city and democratically. It would be said
:06:17. > :06:20.that there was no legally binding - my friends and I settled this
:06:20. > :06:24.divisive issue by asking the public - said we'd be bound by the outcome
:06:24. > :06:26.of the referendum. I think it's a moral question and about judgments
:06:26. > :06:30.about democracy. So you think they're wrong to ignore the result
:06:30. > :06:36.of the referendum? You think they're wrong to ignore the result?
:06:36. > :06:41.Absolutely. Absolutely. I think it's a very difficult but dangerous
:06:41. > :06:45.precedent to the public of Aberdeen that we, as elected representatives,
:06:45. > :06:51.are going to completely ignore your wishes. Labour campaigned in the
:06:51. > :06:53.referendum as a campaign group - a registered campaign group, so they
:06:54. > :06:57.legitimised the referendum by taking part in it, and now they
:06:57. > :07:00.have overturned it today, and I think that is a sad day for the
:07:00. > :07:05.city. Of course, when you were running the council along with the
:07:05. > :07:08.Liberal Democrats, you had a public consultation on the proposed garden
:07:08. > :07:15.site, and you chose to completely ignore the results of your own
:07:15. > :07:21.consultation. That was one interpretation of events. I think
:07:21. > :07:24.the simple fact is that the two are completely incompatible. The
:07:24. > :07:29.referendum asked everyone in Aberdeen purely and simply if they
:07:29. > :07:32.wanted this to happen. Only Aberdeen residents took part. The
:07:32. > :07:35.consultation was open to anyone across the world to take part.
:07:35. > :07:38.LAUGHTER People took part more than once, so
:07:38. > :07:42.I don't... So we had the Scottish National Party, which ignored the
:07:42. > :07:48.result of a consultation it set up, accusing the Labour Party of being
:07:48. > :07:52.undemocratic for ignoring the result of a referendum?
:07:52. > :07:56.Um, I think the issue today is about the referendum. The citizens
:07:56. > :07:59.of Aberdeen will see it that they had their vote that they voted in
:07:59. > :08:03.favour, and the Labour Party said, thank you very much for your
:08:03. > :08:07.opinion, but we're ignoring them altogether, and we will press ahead
:08:07. > :08:13.because we know better. I think the important thing about the... What
:08:13. > :08:16.would you say... Sorry. What would you say to the people who voted -
:08:16. > :08:21.what would you say to the people who voted in good faith in the
:08:21. > :08:25.referendum and expected the result to be honoured? Well, I think that
:08:25. > :08:31.the outcome of the referendum just showed how polarised the city had
:08:31. > :08:35.become, where it was almost 50/50 - I think 52/48. I think that has
:08:35. > :08:39.been the most unfortunate thing about this particular projet, that
:08:39. > :08:42.it's created a level of division in this city that has been unknown for
:08:42. > :08:47.decades. I think certainly for lake, we're determined to overcome that
:08:47. > :08:51.division and try and do our best to try and find common ground, and I
:08:51. > :08:55.think today was as near to a compromise position as could be
:08:55. > :08:58.reached, and I think the positive side to say about this city is the
:08:58. > :09:02.economy is particularly strong. We can have a lot of confidence in
:09:02. > :09:05.that, and I think we can do great things to take this forward. As you
:09:05. > :09:10.know, Barney Crockett, referendums are something of a topical issue at
:09:10. > :09:14.the moment. So your advice to your own colleagues would presumably be
:09:14. > :09:18.that if Labour - if the SNP should win an independence referendum,
:09:18. > :09:22.Labour should stand in the next Scottish elections saying they're
:09:22. > :09:27.not in favour of independence, and even if they're a minority
:09:27. > :09:31.government or part of a coalition, simply scrap the plans? No, I think
:09:31. > :09:36.the critical thing is that referendums in the UK have only
:09:36. > :09:39.ever been used for constitutional issues, and that's their rightful
:09:39. > :09:43.role. If there is a division about the constitutional way forward,
:09:43. > :09:48.then referendums can be used to make a decisive decision. But in
:09:48. > :09:52.things that are not constitutional, then the accountability lies with
:09:52. > :09:55.the level of government that's responsible, and for us in this
:09:55. > :09:58.particular case, local government responsible. Councilors have to
:09:58. > :10:02.take the responsibility, and a referendum is a very inappropriate
:10:02. > :10:05.way. That being said, obviously the referendum did throw up some
:10:06. > :10:10.problems that might affect other referendums, even constitutional
:10:10. > :10:16.ones in the future. And Callum McCaig, your advice to Alex Salmond
:10:16. > :10:21.would presumably be not to make too much fuss about his consultation on
:10:21. > :10:23.the independence referendum because SNP policy is to ignore public
:10:23. > :10:33.politicians unless they give - ignore public consultations unless
:10:33. > :10:35.
:10:35. > :10:39.A think the SNP policy is that we will respect the will of the people
:10:39. > :10:42.when they are asked a straightforward question. I think
:10:42. > :10:46.it is interesting that democracy might be fine for Scotland but not
:10:46. > :10:50.for Aberdeen. I think it would be nice if standards were applied
:10:50. > :10:53.evenly across the country and I think Aberdonians will field that
:10:53. > :10:57.they have been let down by this administration who have basically
:10:57. > :11:02.ignored their views. There's a strong element of Pops and kettles.
:11:02. > :11:07.If it had gone your way you would have hailed it as a triumph of
:11:07. > :11:11.democracy! Had the referendum gone against my stated position which
:11:11. > :11:15.was in favour of this I would have respected that. I believe in
:11:15. > :11:19.democracy and think it is important that when you ask people you stand
:11:19. > :11:23.by their answer. The people have spoken unspoken very clearly. I
:11:23. > :11:27.think appropriately when you have such a divisive issue and that was
:11:27. > :11:29.the reason for suggesting a referendum. It was not really
:11:29. > :11:35.something that councillors could decide with any real mandate from
:11:35. > :11:42.the people. Why not ask the people and see what they have to say. They
:11:42. > :11:46.said yes. Hang on! Either of you can answer this. Whichever one of
:11:46. > :11:51.you wants to. What would you say to people in Aberdeen who look at your
:11:51. > :11:57.performance tonight and say good grief! Is this the best this city
:11:57. > :12:04.can come up with? I think what we have to do his work together as far
:12:04. > :12:09.as we can. There is a rebuild in our relationship to be done. An
:12:09. > :12:12.awful lot of people will be very pleased indeed. We can work
:12:12. > :12:17.together and I think, you mention Scottish government, I think that
:12:17. > :12:20.we can approach Scottish government and have a much more progressive
:12:20. > :12:26.way forward in rebuilding of the relationships that we need to deal
:12:26. > :12:36.and show what Aberdeen can do. Calum McCague, would you like to
:12:36. > :12:38.
:12:39. > :12:44.try and answer the question? think it is a difficult position. I
:12:44. > :12:50.do not think politicians can stand here and say one way or another we
:12:50. > :12:55.public, you have got to put faith in the public. We gave them the
:12:55. > :12:59.opportunity to have their say on this matter, we heard their views
:12:59. > :13:03.on which is kind of them. This has discredited politicians everywhere.
:13:03. > :13:06.Thank you both very much. The pro Unionist parties have come
:13:06. > :13:09.up with their own recommendation for the question they were like to
:13:09. > :13:13.see on the independence referendum ballot paper. The panel of experts
:13:13. > :13:16.task with his projects say it is clearer and more decisive than the
:13:17. > :13:26.Scottish government suggested one. In a moment I will be talking to
:13:26. > :13:31.the Chair of the panel, but first here is Raymond Buchanan. What is
:13:31. > :13:34.in a question? Plenty. Especially if you are deciding the future
:13:34. > :13:39.direction of a country or a nation or even a state. We know what Alex
:13:40. > :13:44.Salmond wants to ask voters in the autumn of 2014. It is short and
:13:44. > :13:52.clear. Let me read it to this chamber. The question is, do you
:13:52. > :13:54.agree that Scotland should be an independent country? The politics
:13:54. > :13:58.around the question are straightforward. The pro-union
:13:58. > :14:05.Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrats rejected Mr Salmond's
:14:05. > :14:11.preferred wording. Instead, they cast a panel with coming up with an
:14:11. > :14:15.alternative question. Today, they replied with the statement. They
:14:15. > :14:20.say at the ballot should stay Scotland should become an
:14:20. > :14:29.independent state. Then invite voters did take I agree or I do not
:14:29. > :14:35.agree. We came to the conclusion that the shorter at the wording
:14:35. > :14:40.possible would lead to clear understanding by the voter as to
:14:40. > :14:45.what the objective was. Not what the arguments were and what all the
:14:45. > :14:48.pros and cons were, but what the objective was. The objective was
:14:48. > :14:52.that Scotland should be an independent country or in
:14:52. > :14:56.independent state. The Scottish government did not exactly dismiss
:14:56. > :14:59.the findings but they were keen to point out the potential
:14:59. > :15:03.difficulties this creates the those opposed to independence. A
:15:03. > :15:06.spokesman said a key point is that the panel's conclusions differ
:15:06. > :15:10.fundamentally from the newspapers expressed by all three opposition
:15:10. > :15:14.parties, significantly there is no reference to the United Kingdom in
:15:15. > :15:18.his proposed question, like the poll commissioned by the anti-
:15:19. > :15:24.independence campaign as recently as the May. It is in stark contrast
:15:24. > :15:29.to the statements of all the opposition parties. In January,
:15:29. > :15:32.Alex Salmond was pretty clear. His preferred words would be on the
:15:33. > :15:38.ballot. Were ever else happens, but question will be on the ballot
:15:38. > :15:45.paper. That seems clear, which means the pro-union parties panel
:15:45. > :15:50.of experts may well have wasted their time. I am joined from our
:15:50. > :15:57.Edinburgh studio by the Chair of the panel lord Sutherland. What is
:15:57. > :16:00.wrong with this suggest a question from Alex Salmond? Where we started
:16:00. > :16:05.from was the question of why the various political parties seem
:16:05. > :16:10.unable to disagree. That is because somehow each of them thinks that a
:16:10. > :16:13.particular form of words will favour their view. We are in
:16:13. > :16:18.independent panel so we went back to first principles and asked
:16:18. > :16:23.ourselves on first principles, clear, understandable, decisive,
:16:23. > :16:28.fair and seen to be what is the best question we can come up with?
:16:28. > :16:32.We looked at international experience on this, there have been
:16:32. > :16:40.70 are 80 referendums Around the World in the last 40 years and we
:16:40. > :16:46.looked we could learn from that. You clearly considered that yours
:16:46. > :16:52.is better than theirs? We went back to first principles. What other
:16:52. > :16:56.flaws in his one? What I want to say is precisely this. If there is
:16:56. > :17:00.an argument going on between political parties so they do not
:17:00. > :17:03.agree what the question is, then that is a distraction from the main
:17:03. > :17:08.issues which is probably the biggest constitutional question to
:17:08. > :17:12.face Scotland for 300 years. What kind of state will we be if we are
:17:12. > :17:16.independent? We came up with what we believe is a genuinely
:17:16. > :17:22.independent question without bias that can be used as a basis for
:17:22. > :17:26.going ahead. Fine, but you are being coy about this. I am not
:17:26. > :17:29.trying to leave you at all! Your commission by three parties that
:17:29. > :17:36.are opposed to Alex Salmond to make the study so you cannot stand back
:17:36. > :17:39.and say we do not want to get involved! We were not commission to
:17:39. > :17:44.come up with a political solution that favoured one group or the
:17:44. > :17:47.other. We were commissioned... seems a coincidence that the leader
:17:48. > :17:51.of one of the parties the committee due to do this study no sooner had
:17:51. > :17:53.you announce your results than they all wrote a letter to Alex Salmond
:17:53. > :17:57.demanding that that should be the question on a referendum paper.
:17:58. > :18:00.They followed procedure that they had laid down. The centre would ask
:18:00. > :18:05.an independent panel to come up with a question and we will accept
:18:05. > :18:08.their advice. They have accepted it and passed it on to Alex Salmond. I
:18:08. > :18:12.am sure that Alex Salmond is a man who wants to hear opinions other
:18:12. > :18:15.than his own, not least from an independent panel, and they have
:18:15. > :18:20.indicated that they will probably look at this and that is the right
:18:20. > :18:24.direction. Do you expect of the proposal to be taken up? By hope so.
:18:24. > :18:29.It is a good proposal but there may be others that can achieve all of
:18:29. > :18:33.these criteria, but what I want to see is that any proposal that is
:18:33. > :18:36.finally put forward to the electoral commission meets the
:18:36. > :18:43.criteria that I think we have general agreement that are
:18:43. > :18:46.appropriate. Am I right in thinking that most of the evidence seems to
:18:46. > :18:49.be what question you ask in a referendum does not make much
:18:50. > :18:54.difference to the outcome? Be it is interesting that there has been a
:18:54. > :18:59.great fuss about individual words. The international evidence is that
:18:59. > :19:03.there is little firm conclusion you can draw from the wording.
:19:03. > :19:08.Sometimes in Leeds in one direction and sometimes another but it is
:19:08. > :19:12.statistically, not uniformly so, it is not that the words or
:19:12. > :19:16.unimportant, it makes it all more important that the words need
:19:16. > :19:21.sensible, commonsense criteria. I do not think anyone has taken
:19:21. > :19:25.exception to any of that. Did you test your question with focus
:19:25. > :19:33.groups for example to try and assess whether it was considered to
:19:33. > :19:37.be a more neutral question than Alex Salmond's. We knew that if a
:19:37. > :19:42.question gets anywhere it will be afforded to the electoral
:19:42. > :19:45.commission who are paid by the state and have a constitutional
:19:45. > :19:49.responsibility to do exactly that. They will do it more thoroughly
:19:49. > :19:55.than a small panel like ours could do. I am not quite sure how that
:19:55. > :20:01.will work. As I understand it, the electoral commission is obliged to
:20:01. > :20:04.road-test questions by a government. The Scottish government is probably
:20:04. > :20:07.not going to put your question to them and there is no suggestion
:20:07. > :20:11.that the British government will suggest a question of its own. I am
:20:11. > :20:15.not sure where that leaves you. perhaps know the Government's
:20:15. > :20:20.better than me. We are contributing to a debate which is a preliminary
:20:20. > :20:25.debate. A debate about words of a referendum. We have got to get this
:20:25. > :20:28.out of the way. At the moment there is an M Paz and that is what we
:20:28. > :20:32.hope to contribute to breaking. Maybe it will be a different
:20:32. > :20:39.question, who knows, but let the discussion be over and done with so
:20:39. > :20:42.that the big issues are become the centre. A I am curious. Would you
:20:42. > :20:47.like the electoral commission to take up your idea and try it out?
:20:47. > :20:53.Yes. A do get round the problem that there is no obligation for
:20:53. > :20:56.them to do that? What I like and in what I have discovered does not
:20:56. > :21:03.necessarily turn out to be the case, but that is no less reason for
:21:03. > :21:09.liking it and actually putting the argument forward for it. Thank you.
:21:09. > :21:14.It a quick look at tomorrow's front pages. A Scotsman, at 14 experts
:21:14. > :21:19.say just one question. We had just heard that. There is a picture of
:21:20. > :21:23.Prince Harry. In the Herald, extra financial support for all Scottish
:21:23. > :21:28.students. In the Scottish Daily Mail, another picture of Prince
:21:28. > :21:34.Harry. Palace fury at the naked for us. The Guardian has says class