|
Etape 2008?
Based upon the experience this June, the reactions accumulated to date, from the consultants’ economic impact report commissioned by Perth & Kinross Council and from the feedback from the Comment community survey which elicited 240 poll form returns, whilst there is widespread local opposition to the Etape, some local people do apparently believe that positive benefits might eventually accrue from a properly formulated and conducted event.
Constructive potential
The report on the meeting at Scotland’s hotel on 16 October indicated a group is forming to assist with feedback to inform the decision making about any future event. This group is urged to assume an entirely positive mindset towards a future Etape event’s potential, and to start by approaching the 2007 marathon as a pilot event.
They are pressed to consider, off the back of its expectations and performance, those elements which need to be re-evaluated and adjusted before any replication.
To achieve the best win-win outcome for all interests, they are encouraged to not rush the process - indeed to assert the default position of: “Get All Our Ducks In A Line for 2009”, and then:
• Address openly the criteria that the Economic Development Department uses to evaluate and prefer the interests of one commercial interest over another
• Explore, fully and transparently, the assertion that the Etape must be a closed-road event (the organiser’s summary report identified that only 42% of participants identified ‘the closed roads’ as its best feature this year).
• Revisit the denial of the potential of a 5/6am start for the avoidance of many of the issues arising from prolonged road closures.
• Justify why the impact of closure could NOT be massively reduced through offering closed roads for the first 20 or 50 riders only (in the light of observers’ evidence from this year’s event).
• Establish that the maximum road closure time on any section should be 2 hours.
• Indicate, unambiguously, the grounds for accepting the unsubstantiated bias of the organisers against holding the event in October prior to the Enchanted Forest, given the ‘added value’ dimension so important to cluster events.
• Re-evaluate the route and properly research a viable alternative that ameliorates the social and commercial impact upon the generality of business and community in Highland Perthshire – especially landusers.
• Avoid the accusation that the organisers have yet again pressed for an early date deliberately to compromise the undertaking of proper consultation by the local authority before their marketing imperative closes down the opportunity for this.
Obstructive potential
A significant number of civically aware Highland Perthshire residents, second-home/timeshare owners and democratically-minded regular visitors are deeply concerned over the handling of 2007 Etape event. Little that has subsequently happened has provided confidence that the shameful process is not already being repeated.
Evidence for this lies in:
• the Ekos Economic Impact report being completed in August, yet not made public nor even partially aired until a closed meeting on 16 October - and the open "Comment" poll being entirely ignored and written out of the official story!
• the process of ‘seeking a consensus’ has been left to the promoters arbitrarily to explore and – in spite of their spectacular failure of communication during 2007 - is not being properly conducted or supervised by the local authority;
• the total unwillingness of the organisers to compromise with regard to an Autumn date, the event start time, the route, the duration of compulsory road closures or the issue of compensation;
• the pressure exerted for a show of hands, at a closed meeting, (consisting of merely a small, partial and skewed commercial and community attendance) on a proposed date and logistic for a repeat 2008 event.
In the view of this group, the “fix is already in” (as American gangsters are wont to say).
But P&K Council has publicly stated its guiding principles to be:
Accountability and transparency:
Ensuring that we are accountable and transparent to the community, our Community Planning partners and the Scottish Executive in our decision-making, planning and delivery of services.
Communication:
Ensuring that we communicate effectively with our employees, our Community Planning partners and the community.
Community Involvement:
Ensuring that we engage effectively with the community, Community Planning partners and employees regarding our activities and decisions, providing opportunities for participation and feedback.
Continuous Improvement:
Ensuring that we use Best Value principles in all our service planning and delivery decisions.
Sustainability:
Ensuring that we consider the long-term sustainability of our decisions.
Many consider these a sick joke in the light of the Etape fiasco. However, in the light of these principles, and their blatant divergence from practice over this event so far, the intervention of the Local Authority Ombudsman is now being actively investigated on the following grounds:
• the lack of public discussion on this issue of road closure and interference with civil liberties;
• the failure to ascertain the views of the people who are most negatively affected;
• the cavalier exercise of delegated power by an unelected official;
• the degree of influence exercised by a private enterprise upon a statutory authority’s decision making over an unprecedented road closure;
• the ready use of a public resource by a private company to make profit;
• the lack of accountability and transparency demonstrated by the local authority in the whole affair.
Ian Buxton
|
