Thank you Andrew. We understood that they had …

Comment posted Crown Estate Commissioners hang on like limpets to Scottish rights by newsroom.

Thank you Andrew. We understood that they had produced separate accounts for Scotland but, in the early days after their decampment, they merged the accounts – although they did later move to disaggregate them in the way you describe.

Your Excel table sounds a very valuable exercise. When you’ve added the 2012 figures, if you would like to email the table to me (lm.henderson@powdermills.com) we could put it in pdf format and add it as an downloadable attachment to this article under your name – along with an explanatory paragraph from you. This wold make it universally available.
Lynda

newsroom also commented

  • We doubt if anyone would see a departure from Charlotte Square as anything other than a corporate diminution – which was allied to a change in accounting practice,removing the previous separate accounting for the Scottish operation. Together these sketch an indicative story that needs to be told.
    We take it that you are not suggesting that the Bells Brae Crown Estate Commission establishment remained identical in number and level in the aftermath of the move from Charlotte Square? You might care to detail both.
  • Fair comment. There is genuine expertise of long standing in those who work for the Crown Estate Commission. We hear favourable remarks on this on a regular basis.

Recent comments by newsroom

  • Supposing CalMac lost the Clyde and Hebridean ferries contract…
    Argyll Ferries is a subsidiary company of Caledonian Macbrayne Ltd, whose parent company is David MacBrayne Limited.
    The brand name’Caledonian MacBrayne’ is owned by CMAL. Apologies for using the shortened version.
    However, we will find out if CalMac is also a registered brand owned by CMAL and will add the answer to that when we get it.
    UPDATED 29 May: Caledonian MacBrayne and CalMac are trading names of CalMac Ferries Ltd (CFL). Caledonian MacBrayne , CalMac and the lion rampant device are registered trademarks of Caledonian Maritime Assets Limited (CMAL)and are used under licence by CalMac Ferries Ltd.
  • The Carmichael lie: another grubby pot condemns the leaking kettle
    Good question.
    The issue at the time was addressing what one could call a persistent local persecution of some ferrymen – and the council’s failure to offer robust protection to their employees.
    The conduct of the abusers was such as to fall clearly within the council’s own criterion of vexatious complainant. They had a written protocol for dealing with such complainants yet had never employed it in relation to these behaviours designed to harrass and damage their employees. On some occasions these behaviours were very much in the extreme, like pack animals ganging up on an individual.
    Several Easdale ferrymen treated in this way developed stress symptoms and had periods where they were unable to work.
    We were anxious to keep readers’ attention focused on what was an issue of serious importance.
    We felt that were we to identify this particular participant, whose behaviours were worryingly threatening, that could have become the main issue; and the less high profile issues of the undefended ferrymen could have got buried.
    The harrassment and abuse that went on, delivered by a specific group – much of which we published – was utterly unprincipled and calculated to be as personally damaging as possible. That was the heart of the matter and that was what we wanted to keep in focus.
    That was the judgment behind the anonymity used at that time.
    That need no longer exists; and the deliberate predation of Carmichael is unpleasant, self-serving and hypocritical.
  • Is David MacBrayne’s Solent enterprise the signal for the end of Calmac?
    Agreed on all points.
  • Is David MacBrayne’s Solent enterprise the signal for the end of Calmac?
    We can’t see that port management expertise can be present in David MacBrayne or in Calmac at any level at the moment – because the two companies remaining in the group are ferry operators and have no port management to do – so why would they have staff with unusable expertise?
    CMAL has been the port manager now for a considerable time.
    So DML would have to buy in specialist expertise while retaining their most senior staff to run the non-technical aspects of the operation – of which there will be many.
    Top level staff are not normal TUPE transfers since new companies generally prefer to put in their own appointments.
    If CalMac retain the Clyde and Hebridean Ferries contract, they will not be able to run Marchwood as well – because they won’t have top management staff to spare and will have to hire in even more.
    This just doesn’t fit with a state owned company because they don’t exist to make money but to provide services.
    The scenario we propose is the only one we can see making any sense.
  • Weak, nervous and unsearching: Audit Scotland report into Argyll and Bute Council ADP procurement
    This is a finely balanced point.
    What the report has said is contradictory in spirit because what they said on the lack of correspondence [implicitly of complaint] was intended to exonerate a process in dispute.
    The two third sector organisations that were unable even to bid – because of the same eccentric process that might have disadvantaged actual bidders – had been equally disadvantaged by being misled into thinking they could not responsibly bid.
    Therefore the experience of the two third sector groups provides evidence which contradicts the exoneration of the process founded on the fact that no disappointed bidder had complained to the audit team.
    Beyond that and on a different aspect of this matter – no one is entitled to assume that the lack of complaint and/or correspondence can safely be read as contentment with process.
    Given the performance of Audit Scotland in this review, there will be those who will see no point in bothering with the Commission.

powered by SEO Super Comments

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • LinkedIn
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Ma.gnolia
  • NewsVine
  • StumbleUpon
  • SphereIt
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • Print

12 Responses to Thank you Andrew. We understood that they had …

  1. Good to see that you are still pursuing and publishing on the Crown Estate. But one variation from the article. The Crown Estate’s Annual Report and Accounts do provide material for the whole UK under each of its main budget areas. Its Scottish Report provides data about Scottish income and expenditure under the same budget headings, so it is possible to analyse its performance in Scotland on its own and against the position for the UK as a whole. A year ago I created an Excel table to complete a Scottish/UK analysis and comparison for 2001 and 2011, and will update that with the 2012 figures – happy to provide that to anyone interested in the statistics if they e-mail me on: andrewmreid@btinternet.com;
    andrew

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Thank you Andrew. We understood that they had produced separate accounts for Scotland but, in the early days after their decampment, they merged the accounts – although they did later move to disaggregate them in the way you describe.

      Your Excel table sounds a very valuable exercise. When you’ve added the 2012 figures, if you would like to email the table to me (lm.henderson@powdermills.com) we could put it in pdf format and add it as an downloadable attachment to this article under your name – along with an explanatory paragraph from you. This wold make it universally available.
      Lynda

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Pingback: Argyll News: Community Land Scotland see case for change to Crown Estate Commission ‘undiminished’ | For Argyll

  3. While supporting the thinking that monies collected by the Crown Estate in Scotland should remain in Scotland and that administration of Scottish waters should be based in Scotland, I have concerns about what sort of body will replace the CEC should its powers be taken over.

    As a seafarer and mooring holder, I dread to think what would happen if the likes of Argyll and Bute Council got hold of the rights to collect the rent. A system of sea bed administration which works well, however unfairly from a Scottish perspective, will be demolished at a stroke to be replaced by inept, short term political greed – seeing every mooring as a cash cow. Chaos and anarchy would ensue as rents would be unpaid, moorings laid anywhere without control and there would be a complete lack of policing. The cash cow would quickly become a burden to the council tax payer.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Fair comment. There is genuine expertise of long standing in those who work for the Crown Estate Commission. We hear favourable remarks on this on a regular basis.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • It would be interesting to know what happens in places like Norway or the Aland islands, where the pattern of activity in coastal waters must be similar to that in Argyll.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Not sure if this is usefull to the discusion or not but in Dundee control of the shore was handed to the local council who then upped the rent local sailing clubs were paying for their slipways by around 400%.

      Tony Gill raises a very good point and I dread to think what would happen if the councils were given control of the seabed as well.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Pingback: Argyll News: Correctionlon on ‘reforms’ to Crown Estate Commission Scottish operation | For Argyll

  5. I do think it matters if responsible jounalists get their facts right when writing critical articles of this nature. The Crown Estate Office in Edinburgh has never been closed. It merely moved premises from Charlotte Square to Bells Brae in 2003. True some functions -control of the urban estate-moved to London but that is an entirely different matter.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • We doubt if anyone would see a departure from Charlotte Square as anything other than a corporate diminution – which was allied to a change in accounting practice,removing the previous separate accounting for the Scottish operation. Together these sketch an indicative story that needs to be told.
      We take it that you are not suggesting that the Bells Brae Crown Estate Commission establishment remained identical in number and level in the aftermath of the move from Charlotte Square? You might care to detail both.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. I’m looking forward to a continuation of the story. I must admit when I formulated a reply to the Crown estate Consultation on behalf of the Scottish Islands Federation, which is available in full as a book and as far as I know online, the conclusion I drew is that although the Crown estate where perhaps not fully transparent, the formation of an independent Scottish advisory board to act according to Existing Scottish law on behalf of Scottish people. I mean people who are perhaps retired but who have a great knowledge of the various subjects to be considered, particularly maritime affairs, but who are independent of businesses. In September the Scottish Islands Federation (SIF) are hosting the AGM of the European Small Islands Network (ESIN) on Mull so we could gather together information on how it’s done elsewhere. The independent islands seem to be more empowered. Unfortunately local authorities have often disempowered local coastal inhabitants.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. Your article stated quite clearly that the Crown Estate had shut its Edinburgh Office. Why can’t you admit you were wrong instead of trying to muddy the waters? Who cares where their office is so long as they have one and as for staff numbers they like many other organisations have flucuated through the years.
    You make some perfectly reasonable points in your article and then spoil it with a lack of balance.Why not mention some positive points? Without the Crown Estate fish farming would never have seen the light of day in Scotland and many fragile West Coast communities would have died along with the deep sea fishing industry. Secondly the tenanted farms on the Crowns’s rural holdings are the best equipped anywhere in Scotland as any visitor to Glenlivet or Fochabers will tell you.But you don’t want your readers to know that do you?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


All the latest comments (including yours) straight to your mailbox, everyday! Click here to subscribe.