Poet of the Macabre Posted September 29, 2015 Author Share Posted September 29, 2015 Was the down to Geoff Ellis? Im not sure who's who but i would still want it in Balado. Would Stirling not be a bad patch for flooding? There's a health and safety issue at Balado. There's some sort of pipeline(?) under the ground that would be very grim if it burst with tens of thousands of people there. It's next to impossible that happens but Perth & Kinross council couldn't give them a safety licence because of it. I know Stirling and VisitScotland were quite keen on the idea of bringing T here a year or two ago. Don't know about flooding, could be an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throbber Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 The pipeline must have been known about for years so why pull the plug on 2014? Have heard people say that no authority has condemned the site and this was just used as an excuse to move. What was obvious from people I spoke to was it was a disorganised farce of a festival and there were corners cut. Don't know Stirling that well I was just under the impression that the are you suggested was bad for flooding Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob the tank Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Well that was a fair and balanced report about TITP on EBC Scotland just now. SNP cronyism and SNPBAD. Kinda knew that would be their take on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 The pipeline must have been known about for years so why pull the plug on 2014? Have heard people say that no authority has condemned the site and this was just used as an excuse to move. What was obvious from people I spoke to was it was a disorganised farce of a festival and there were corners cut. Don't know Stirling that well I was just under the impression that the are you suggested was bad for flooding I can confirm that PKC could not give them a license due to a gas pipeline under the site.The HSE had raised objections for years and had threatened to refer it to Scottish Govt if 2014 wasn't the last one at balado. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Whataboutery alert. Giving it to a charity is a much better idea. Just ask the UK regarding their recent £3m grant to a charity. Anyway, I dont agree in the SG giving this money to TITP but if it boosts economic activity then there is some justification for direct investment. Councils, Government and even organisations such as the Princes Trust do this all the time. If there has been cronyism then I would expect we will never fully know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shannon Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Why invest 150k in TITP for "culture and music" but let the new Scottish police close down the biggest music & culture venue in the West of Scotland in the Arches!? Invest in something due to returns and popular opinion but let the most important music and arts venue in Glasgow close down even though TITP has had drug deaths in the past too. Don't like the smell of this and I am a long term SNP supporter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Would the event have still been commercially viable without the investment? If yes, I don't see why we should be paying for it out of taxpayers' funds unless there is a clear additional public benefit coming out of it. With things like international football tournaments or the Olympics or Commonwealths you have events that are using government money to leverage private investment and to provide clear external benefits like new facilities and training infrastructure for communities. A last-minute cash-injection into TITP's coffers doesn't seem to be comparable to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Also disappointed to see Pete Wishart talking Scotland down on Twitter by saying that if the Scottish Government didn't do things like subsidise Tea in the Park, Scotland would have hardly any culture. That's Wastmonster patter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Would the event have still been commercially viable without the investment? Yep but that isn't the way it works as we both know. If the event didn't take place would there be a financial cost is the argument that would have been used to justify the expenditure. The underlying issue here is the totally un-necessary need for them to move in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Also disappointed to see Pete Wishart talking Scotland down on Twitter by saying that if the Scottish Government didn't do things like subsidise Tea in the Park, Scotland would have hardly any culture. That's Wastmonster patter. I think culture is a stretch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Yep but that isn't the way it works as we both know. If the event didn't take place would there be a financial cost is the argument that would have been used to justify the expenditure. The underlying issue here is the totally un-necessary need for them to move in the first place. In which case we have to be concerned about a culture that allows corporate entities to blame governments for them not making as much money on an event as they otherwise would have in order to secure grant funding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 I think culture is a stretch. Well quite. That's not the main thing that's wrong with what he was saying though. The notion that Scotland without the benevolent Scottish Government is bereft of cultural experience and output, or even rich and vibrant cultural industries in terms of the dolla, is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Well quite. That's not the main thing that's wrong with what he was saying though. The notion that Scotland without the benevolent Scottish Government is bereft of cultural experience and output, or even rich and vibrant cultural industries in terms of the dolla, is ridiculous.I agree. Although I think it's quite right that the state does fund the arts where necessary.Despite what I said further up about it happening all the time that would be in defence of any implied wrongdoing. However, the idea that private profit making companies should expect state hand outs because they put a lot in is bullshit. Pete having a mare on twitter I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 In which case we have to be concerned about a culture that allows corporate entities to blame governments for them not making as much money on an event as they otherwise would have in order to secure grant funding. It isn't just events that do this, all inward investment that receive government grants are the same. The claim is that this was a one-off grant to facilitate the move and that the event generates 20m per annum of economic activity. This isn't to excuse the SG as I have already stated that I don't believe that they should have provided the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 It isn't just events that do this, all inward investment that receive government grants are the same. The claim is that this was a one-off grant to facilitate the move and that the event generates 20m per annum of economic activity. This isn't to excuse the SG as I have already stated that I don't believe that they should have provided the money. That's fair. Every funding application starts-off as a "one-off" for "exceptional circumstances" before growing arms and legs. You needn't remind me of that... I work in academia! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Whataboutery alert. Giving it to a charity is a much better idea. Just ask the UK regarding their recent £3m grant to a charity. Anyway, I dont agree in the SG giving this money to TITP but if it boosts economic activity then there is some justification for direct investment. Councils, Government and even organisations such as the Princes Trust do this all the time. If there has been cronyism then I would expect we will never fully know. Well, quite. Edinburgh Council gives £2.38M to directors of Edinburgh Festival and £1M to Hogmanay organisers. Also disappointed to see Pete Wishart talking Scotland down on Twitter by saying that if the Scottish Government didn't do things like subsidise Tea in the Park, Scotland would have hardly any culture. That's Wastmonster patter. You know what else is disappointing? To see you turning into a raving Britnat, day by day, right in front of our eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antiochas III Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Would the event have still been commercially viable without the investment? If yes, I don't see why we should be paying for it out of taxpayers' funds unless there is a clear additional public benefit coming out of it. With things like international football tournaments or the Olympics or Commonwealths you have events that are using government money to leverage private investment and to provide clear external benefits like new facilities and training infrastructure for communities. A last-minute cash-injection into TITP's coffers doesn't seem to be comparable to that. But you know that's not how it turns out. Gov funds were used to build Wembley - good luck getting a community kick about on it. Same with The Olympic Stadium. The better for the community pish, is and always will be pish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Considering the SNP attitude towards football fan being allowed a pint in view of the pitch I'm surprised they support T in the park Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Considering the SNP attitude towards football fan being allowed a pint in view of the pitch I'm surprised they support T in the park Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Master Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 I'm fairly sure that if you added £1 to the cost of every TitP ticket, it would still be a sell-out while also raising more than the £150k the SG put in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.