Braving perfectly foul Edinburgh spring weather, which had reduced the Spurtle posters outside to tattered mush before kick-off, 5 candidates for the City of Edinburgh Council's City Centre ward gathered at a hustings in Bellevue Crescent last night to meet the public.
The public, avoiding perfectly foul Edinburgh spring weather and politics, preferring instead, perhaps, the seductive thrills of Real Madrid versus Bayern Munich or Sir Alan Sugar on the telly, stayed away in droves.
There were more than one or two unoccupied seats for those who arrived late.
However, what emerged from this intimate encounter was rather surprising. Harald Tobermann (Chair) gave an opinionated and voluble audience the opportunity to reply to candidates' answers. This they did with some enthusiasm, refusing to accept vague answers or airy assurances, demanding promises, responding with counter-arguments and supporting statistics of their own.
There was no hiding place for those on the podium, and in some ways this unusual turn made for one of the most interesting local hustings in recent memory. Below is one audience member's summary with personal observations.
INTRODUCTIONS
Six candidates are standing for 3 seats. All present were given 2 minutes, without interruption, to introduce themselves.
Iain Coleman (IC), Liberal Democrat: A science writer at Edinburgh University who has lived here for the past 6 years. Previous experience as Executive Councillor for Environmental Services in the City of Cambridge Council (2004–6). City Centre ward here is 'the best part of the best city in the world'. Lib Dem achievements over past 5 years include: improvements to housing, Festival, help for the elderly, education, crime reduction, and putting city finances back on an even keel. Councillors must try harder to identify and meet locals' priorities.
Julita Mazurek (Greens) is expecting a baby, and was represented by Melanie Main (MM, candidate in Meadows/Morningside). MM said JM would be a conscientious and hard-working councillor if elected. Green principles include: environment as basis of society; equality and self-respect; radical decentralisation of democracy handing control to individuals. As a long-standing community councillor, MM well understands public frustration with Council.
Joanne Mowat (JM), Conservatives: Incumbent City Centre councillor. Lived in in this area for 20 years. Concerned by loss in this ward of 1,500 registered voters since 2007. As councillor has contributed several 'chunky motions' on sustaining livability in city centre. Keen to preserve city's buiilt heritage, restore financial responsibility, cut out waste. Wants to put politicians back in charge of council officers.
Alasdair Rankin (AR), Scottish National Party: Worked for the Ministry of Defence in Whitehall for 15 years, then Clerk to 2 Holyrood committees. Since 2007 has worked with the Third Sector advising on how to interact with government. Became councillor in August 2011. Stands for: responsbility and ambition for Edinburgh, particularly regarding finances and efficient services. Edinburgh has fared comparatively well in recession, but SNP keen not to leave behind the disadvantaged. Represent the whole people outwith the 'two-party Westminster dogfight'.
Karen Doran (KD), Labour: A local herself, with 20 years' experience as Malcolm Chisholm's office manager. City-centre residents feel neglected. Very interested in working at micro level to address, e.g.: tramwork disruption, recycling, anti-social behaviour, accessibility and safe pavements.
Karen Hetherington (Liberal Party in Scotland), of whose contact details or political beliefs we could find no mention on the web, did not attend.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Question 1: What would you do about buses (e.g. loss of Services 17, 19) and how road repairs are prioritised?
[img_assist|nid=2951|title=Melanie Main, Green|desc=|link=node|align=right|width=157|height=200]MM: Edinburgh lucky to have Lothian Buses owned by the city. Bus services can be restored if there's demand, but loss of City Centre residents may explain downturn in usage. Prioritise streets for use by public transport and bikes.
JM: Service 17 was already subsidised, but didn't break even. Service 13 transferred to best tender (private sector). Favours CEC supporting socially important routes. 'Lack of clarity' on decisionmaking about road and pavement maintenance. Refurbishment of E. Scotland Street Lane was 'madness'. Conservatives committed to reviewing processes.
AR: There are limits to how much Council can support financially non-viable bus services. Cannot see bus services expanding in current financial climate. Can't improve all roads simultaneously, but SNP has at least found £3m for repairing potholes (not just throwing gravel at them) and made £20m commitment to further improvements.
KD: Buses vital to city. Long-standing problems with local roads and pavements. Seafield Rd pavement expensively resurfaced lately, but has never seen a pedestrian on it. Priorities!
IC: Long-standing underinvestment in roads and pavements. Situation improved over last 5 years, but consultation with locals should be more made more effective. Lib Dems say no-one should be more than 10 mins from a bus route, and so will lobby against SNP Government cuts of subsidies for bus operators.
Audience comeback: There's a major difference between councillors' aspirations and reality. Mike Turley [CEC Director of Services for Communities] says there's no prospect of budget funding improvements. Fairy tales! Disconnect between the truth and what's promised. Need for realism.
Question 2: Banning cars from Princes Street (a 6-lane highway where people don't live) displaces traffic through 2-lane streets in the New Town and West End (where people do live), causing pollution. What will you do to reduce traffic in residential areas?
[img_assist|nid=2952|title=Joanna Mowat, Conservative|desc=|link=node|align=right|width=200|height=200]JM: This is a citywide problem which Conservatives are committed in manifesto to address. Will require realistic budget-setting, not tinkering with 1% margins. Traffic must be redistributed to use biggest streets, not narrowest. Flexible solutions possible, e.g. opening Shandwick Place at night.
AR: CEC has statutory duties on budgets. SNP very serious about raising spending. ['Where will the money come from?' asks JM. Exasperated sigh from AR, then 'From the overall budget'.] Current traffic arrangements are a temporary not permanent arrangement.
KD: Labour committed to finishing roadworks within 2 years of tramworks' completion. Transport Forum would welcome more local input on solutions, as with recent consultation on Leith Walk's future.
IC: Cross-party consensus on need to manage traffic flows. Appalled at audience suggestion that CEC officer has not attended public meeting – 'If that's true, he deserves a good kick in the backside'. Council officers do not set budgets, councillors do. I have previous experience from time in Cambridge to handle this well if elected.
MM: One root problem is too much secrecy by domineering council officers. Long-term trend may be cause for optimism: in South Side during rush hour, number of cars is falling, number of bikes increasing. Agrees with JM on need to keep lorries out of residential areas. [Running out of time, lost thread, looked surprised.]
Question 3: As you can see, I'm blind. I spend a lot of time walking, but my city, my place is now a foreign country. What on earth is going on down by the river? They're massacring Edinburgh. What's the reason?
[img_assist|nid=2954|title=Alasdair Rankin, SNP|desc=|link=node|align=right|width=171|height=200]AR: Tram construction is causing inconvenience and difficulty for all pedestrians. By the river, there is a necessary flood prevention programme under way.
KD: It's great that vital flood prevention measures have started. Hopefully, they'll be over soon. Tramworks are a disaster. Know of wheelchair users who were housebound for 3 months because local pavements were unusable. Hope for better soon.
IC: Flood prevention measures are essential. Global climate change means worsening and more frequent floods. CEC has engaged cycling, car and bus users of roads; but pedestrians using footways 'have slipped through the crack'. Council should use Neighbourhood Partnerships and Community Councils to prioritise necessary improvements at local level. CEC should do better.
MM: Greens have a cycling and walking strategy, and are not solely focused on tramworks. Money should not be spent in the last few weeks before an election in a sudden rash of pothole repairs. They [the Coalition] are playing politics with your money. [IC asks: 'Do you want more potholes or fewer potholes? MM replies: 'I want honest potholes'.]
JM: Conservative manifesto prioritises permanent fixes to ensure safe roads and pavements, 'not just pothole bungs from election warchests'. I have been highlighting a pothole at the top of Broughton Street since the 2007 election – cyclists are always complaining about it.
Question 4: What will you do for the local built heritage?
[img_assist|nid=2955|title=Karen Doran, Labour|desc=|link=node|align=right|width=191|height=200]KD: Appalled at 'horrific' proposed VAT increase on improvements to listed buildings. There are 32,000 listed buildings in Edinburgh which would be at risk of 'dramatic damage' if this went ahead.
IC: Lib Dems hope to continue long-term care for structures (as with Usher Hall and Assembly Rooms). Edinburgh's built heritage is vitally important to why people want to work, study and holiday in this city. It's a very important priority for the Lib Dems.
MM: Council should stand by promises to protect [an inaudible area] where developers plan 140 houses and 400 car parking spaces on a protected hill.
JM: Has responded personally to HMRC VAT proposal, and motioned Council to do the same. Suggests levelling VAT rate on all improvements to 5%. Recently heard built environment described as 'the physical manifestation of our cultural and intellectual heritage': we are all temporary custodians of the city and have a duty to protect and enhance it. Too few councillors think likewise often enough.
AR: SNP manifesto contains commitment to preserving Edinburgh's unique built heritage and managing its complexities.
Question 5: [In response to JM's introductory observation.] Why is City Centre population falling and what single initiative would you favour to counteract this?
[img_assist|nid=2956|title=Iain Coleman, Liberal Democrat|desc=|link=node|align=right|width=172|height=200]IC: The straight answer is: I don't know. My wife and I are doing our very best to increase the population. I'm interested to hear what others have to say about this.
MM: There's a huge problem with holiday lets, which aren't regulated. I suspect JM may know more about this. In the Old Town, many folk no longer have neighbours who care for their area. It's a nuisance which we could tackle with a bed-tax and better regulation. Only 3 people live on Princes Street. The city contains 10,000 empty houses. A Green initiative in Brighton appointed an Empty Homes Officer: number of empty houses reduced by 75% in 1 year.
JM: I began by saying that the number of registered voters (not residents) had fallen. (1) I agree that party flats are a problem, and I've been working with Sarah Boyack [Lab.], Marco Biaggi [SNP] and Andrew Burns [Lab.] to see what powers we have and how they can be enforced. (2) An increased number of non-voting students may be a factor. Their numbers must be carefully balanced with full-time resident population. (3) Night-time disruption, vomit on stairs, bars open till 4am in Old Town make life intolerable. (4) Vicious circle of fewer people, fewer shops, reduced quality of life. (5) Empty Homes Officer is the one good Green idea I've heard in ages and I intend to pinch it.
AR: Demographic predictions suggest population shift in Scotland from west to east; Edinburgh's population to be 500,000 in August. Old Town's population has increased. Not sure size of electoral register is a good indicator of what's going on, but interesting start-point for a worthwhile cross-party discussion. Let's look for best practice in combating 'ludicrous excesses of hen and stag parties'.
KD: 'When I've been going round the doors', people tell me they're tired of footfall, noise, dirty streets, party flats, expensively clogged drains. From Grassmarket to Broughton Street. We must fill empty houses.
Audience comeback: A worse problem is displaced traffic. Name one, quantifiable benefit to locals of limiting traffic access to Princes Street.
MM: [Struggled to identify the question. Struggled to answer it. Admitted to not having a detailed knowledge of every single item in the Green manifesto.]
JM: Can't find a quantifiable benefit. I am not in favour of this proposal for Princes Street.
AR: [Somewhat disdainfully declined to provide a 'quantifiable benefit'.] We must reduce traffic volumes by, for example, improving park-and-ride facilities.
KD: I'm not in favour of pedestrianising Princes Street. Displaced traffic will damage old buildings. Must find alternatives to car use, such as supporting bus services.
IC: KD has put her finger on it – how do we reduce private car volumes? Trams are best way to attract drivers out of their vehicles. A quantifiable benefit would be to reduce car traffic, which you could measure through monitoring air quality.
Audience comeback: Trams don't have enough capacity to carry the number of people in cars who will be displaced from Princes Street. Nothing you can do will work except reversing the decision to have trams. [First round of applause from audience all evening.]
Question 6: Major contracts in the private sector usually have a carrot-and-stick approach, with incentive clauses for early delivery and penalty clauses for failure. Will you commit to demanding penalty clauses in all future Council contracts?
[img_assist|nid=2930|title=Karen Hetherington (artist's impression), Liberal Party in Scotland |desc=|link=node|align=right|width=161|height=200]MM: SNP washed their hands of the contract. I'm happy to accept penalty clauses. I'd also scrutinise statutory notice procedures very carefully. Contract process is appalling in Edinburgh – officials' secrecy. Councillors must stand up to them.
JM: I have no problem with that. We need better procurement and decent contracts.
AR: I agree. However, not all public budgets end in disaster.
KD: I agree.
IC: I agree. Perfectly good common-sense. Lib Dem manifesto also calls for a public enquiry into the tram fiasco. [Audience mutterings about huge cost of Holyrood enquiry with nobody taking the blame at the end.]
Audience comeback: To MM – 'You haven't said whether you'll commit.' MM: 'Yes I have." "No, you haven't.' MM: 'All right then, yes I commit.'
Question 7: Are you in favour of contracting-out some Council services where quality can be maintained and efficiency improved?
[img_assist|nid=2958|title=Outsourcing – better for whom?|desc=|link=node|align=right|width=200|height=148]AR: We in the SNP approached the Alternative Business Model (ABM) with an open mind, but when it came to the co-mingling element of waste collection I was unconvinced. The research into this was not a waste of £4m because it has and will continue to result in more efficient Council practices. I am quite happy to consider contracting-out for the 3rd sector in future.
KD: I am against outsourcing. Cheaper bids are only possible through reducing employees' pay and conditions. CEC services must be run more efficiently. [Tiny ripple of audience applause.]
IC: I was disappointed by rejection of the ABM. As councillor in charge of Environmental Services down south, I found outsourcing acceptable. I found ideological objections in Edinburgh disappointing. It will now be very difficult to find the same level of savings.
MM: I was opposed to the proposal which would have outsourced 40% of CEC workforce. Savings are made at employees' expense. In any case, Waste Resource Association say contaminated waste (as happens in co-mingling different rubbish types) is worthless unless sent to China for cleaning.
JM: Conservatives support outsourcing. In case of ABM, every saving was contractually underpinned by promises to improve standards. Personally visited outsourced employees in Corby and London – all of whom had retained pension rights. (They were protected by the 'Transfer of Undertakings Provision'.) Financial savings result from efficiency savings.
Audience comeback: Problems with Edinburgh waste management began with separation of commercial and domestic collections. [Chair, identifying persistent questioner and pointing to where Karen Hetherington should have been: 'Look, there's an empty chair. Next time we have an election, I want to see you to be sitting in it.']
Question 8: Cost of trams has risen from £545m to £772m, as far as St Andrew Square only. Next time CEC is asked for a further contribution, what will be your response?
[img_assist|nid=2957|title=Less of a tram, more of a light railway|desc=|link=node|align=right|width=200|height=152]IC: It's an awful situation which now appears to be getting better. We need a rigorous public enquiry. I hope the value of the trams will become evident in a few years' time.
MM: A complete fiasco. You can only shake your head and wonder how it could have been so badly managed. CEC shouldn't spend any more money. I hope it doesn't end up in parts of the line being privatised.
JM: Conservatives wanted to stop at Haymarket. Could then have extracted CEC from current contract and taken time to consider best options for crossing city centre. Scottish Government should have policed progress better. SNP/Lib Dem Coalition divisions made situation worse. Poor leadership at senior level. We still don't have technical drawings for York Place spur [audible intake of breath from audience] – therefore can't guarantee if more money will or won't be required. I am against extending the line to York Place. [The day after the hustings, JM received confirmation that a plan does now exist, although whether it has been costed was unclear.]
AR: To stop at Haymarket would have rendered trams a loss-maker. Extension to St Andrew Square will result in £4m profit per year. I understand public's frustration and cynicism, but only option now is to wait and see.
KD: I was hoping for something more positive from AR. But no point in mud-slinging. Other cities manage, why can't we? Let's get trams finished.
Audience comeback 1: CEC's loan for trams is to be paid back over 30 years. With interest, it will cost over £1 billion. So [to AR] what will you say if they come back to you asking for more money? [AR replies: I would not spend any more money.]
Audience comeback 2: Anyone who thinks they can extract a £4m per year profit from 5m passengers is not talking about a practical or realistic business model.
SO HOW DID THEY FAIR ON THE NIGHT?
Most candidates managed to weave the words fiasco, transparency, consultation and priorities at least once into each of their answers. As in last year's City Centre hustings, there was an obvious current of hostility on the part of politicians towards overweening and secretive officials. Is this a genuine irritation, or a convenient means to deflect voters' annoyance? If so, it didn't appear to work this evening. There was a noticeable lack of supportive applause for anyone on the podium.
Below are one observer's thumb-nail impressions of how each candidate performed. Spurtle has no party-political line – we welcome readers' own impressions for publication.
Iain Coleman (Liberal Democrat): Quietly assured, but made remarkably little of his 2 years in a senior executive position successfully managing issues which came up in the questions. Audience enjoyed his candid admission of ignorance about population decline, and prompt passing of microphone to horrified neighbour. Made the best off-the-cuff joke of the evening.
Karen Doran (Labour): Her strong points are an approachable demeanour and pragmatic Labour grit. Of all the candidates, she seemed the most likely to find out constitutents' grassroots concerns. It's harder to see her as a strategic politician or policymaker, and she was short on vision concerning some of the larger issues affecting this ward and Edinburgh as a whole.
Karen Hetherington (Liberal Party in Scotland): As someone who didn't turn up, explain her absence, send a replacement or convey any kind of useful information about herself at all, she was faultless.
Melanie Main (Green) standing in for Julita Mazurek: Off her home turf, and it sometimes showed in a shortage of local examples or applications. Brilliantly seized the moment when championing Green initiative to reduce empty homes in Brighton. Original and quick-thinking call for 'honest potholes'.
Joanna Mowat (Conservative): Easily the most energetic, acute and flexible thinker on the night, with strong grasp of detail on all issues which emerged. Dominated proceedings as most experienced candidate, and the only one with a convincing track record of 'chunky' political activity.
Alasdair Rankin (SNP): Urbane, courteous, effortlessly on-message, with fewer of those impatient and original sparks which amused/appalled/encouraged/enlivened the audience at last August's by-election hustings. Steady pair of hands. Has not yet mastered the trick of looking as interested in other people's opinions as he is in his own.