Foreign Policy is a quasi academic thing that my colleagues read:
Interesting (to me) mention of George Square - linking Uni role to fear of large scale re-development.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Foreign Policy article on Independence, with focus on Edinburgh urban planning
(54 posts)-
Posted 11 years ago #
-
That is weird logic. The current state of Edinburgh happened during Scotland's 300-odd years of UK membership. How can one judge a future independent Scotland by how it's been shaped by the UK, before independence has been achieved? The whole point of independence is to improve things, to make them better than the current crappy state they're in.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I think the point he's making is that Edinburgh's condition is largely self-inflicted so as an example of vision etc it doesn't bode well for independence. The independence thing seems to me to be a pretty lame attempt to give his grand sweep of Edinburgh's development failures some contemporary relevance to his Foreign Policy audience.
Still, it would be interesting to know how independence is going to make things better. The Scottish Government has hardly made itself a shining example of brave new thinking even with the devolved powers it has. Motorways between our cities and resilience on the Forth. Sheesh.
Posted 11 years ago # -
We had a very interesting training thing here with some Brussels-based lawyers a few weeks back that focussed on Independence for Scotland and secession from the EU by the UK. All incredibly interesting (and detached from the emotional arguments on either side).
Made me even more likely to vote the way I've always thought I'd vote, and makes you realise just how little detail anyone is willing to go into on this in mainstream politics and media.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I just noticed that there's an 'independence simulation' being run at the Uni. Also a debate in a couple of weeks.
But as wc's example hints, lots of consultants and others making big bucks out of being 'experts' too..
Posted 11 years ago # -
Yes, article is 'reasonable' critique of some aspects of decades of dubious planning (in Edinburgh), but to jump to the conclusion that that makes Scotland unsuitable for independence is - well - a non-sequitur.
If Scotland becomes independent 'this time round' or in the future it won't instantly change many things - including planning laws and the fact that (for instance) much of Princes Street is probably owned by people's pension plans.
SNP Government to date hasn't shown much sign of doing things very differently (though it was against the tram) - but there is no reason to assume that the SNP would actually be in control. Not that other parties show much signs of advocating polices that would change too much. Even the Greens seem to see a rosy future for electric cars!
Posted 11 years ago # -
I'm not convinced that independence is an issue one way or the other with regard to urban planning. But I agree with the article that we should look to Copenhagen to see how a city should be.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Even the Greens seem to see a rosy future for electric cars!
Not really. Greens are generally much more in favour of active travel and public transport.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"6 February 2013
Scottish Greens are warning SNP ministers they can't hide their poor transport choices by suggesting electric vehicles will get Scotland's carbon emissions back on track.
The government's revised climate change policies for transport for the coming year, which are supposed to inform the Scottish budget being voted on in parliament today (6 Feb), will allow an extra half a million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions from transport alone in 2013-14.
Greens do not oppose the announcement of funding for additional charging points for electric vehicles but point out that it cannot offset those emissions. Figures from government agency Transport Scotland show there are only 198 electric cars in Scotland out of 2.7 million licensed vehicles, and there only 80 public charging places despite an aim to have over 500 by the end of 2012/13 - that's just eight weeks away.
Patrick Harvie, MSP for Glasgow and transport spokesperson for the Scottish Greens, said:
"Electric vehicles can only properly cut our transport emissions if we have much more renewable electricity on the grid and tariffs to encourage owners to charge them at non-peak times. It’s therefore essential that ministers put traffic demand management back into their plans, and beef up their support for public transport and safer cycling.
"The SNP are putting their trust in a single future technological marvel when they have options to reduce emissions right now. Electric vehicles are an important part of the mix but they won't solve the traffic jams that harm our economy, and they won't deliver the short term CO2 reductions we need to get back on track.""
Posted 11 years ago # -
One can safely ignore any article that abuses the word "Scotch"
Posted 11 years ago # -
http://www.scotsman.com/news/us-magazine-s-damning-criticism-of-edinburgh-1-2797002
"
AN academic who caused outrage by slamming Edinburgh in an article for one of the world’s most respected intellectual publications has defended his analysis of the city.
""
Professor Williams also insisted it was the American magazine and not himself had sought to link the article with the Scottish independence debate and revealed that he may yet vote yes in the 2014 referendum.
"Posted 11 years ago # -
How can anyone be outraged? He is completely correct, apart from the nonsense about Independance of course. Edinburgh has become a right dump over the past few years.
Posted 11 years ago # -
The article drew criticism from bodies including the city’s chamber of commerce, the city council and tourism body VisitScotland, while Trainspotting author Irvine Welsh called it “crap”.
Rofl, did they actually read Irvine Welsh's statement?
“Surely the state of Edinburgh as a tatty, run-down museum, economically and culturally stagnant, devoid of the vision and focus a true capital city needs, is precisely why it needs to be a de facto capital, not languishing in its weary, second-rate, neither-fish-nor-fowl status.
“It’s a bit like not allowing Andy Murray to hold a tennis racket, then saying he’s probably not good enough to compete at Wimbledon. Do they actually pay people to write this crap?”
Do they actually pay people to write Scotsman articles?
Posted 11 years ago # -
I don't think de facto means what he thinks it means.
Posted 11 years ago # -
No, I couldn't work that one out either but I worked out the gist of what he was saying.
Posted 11 years ago # -
This is what I have always assumed it meant -
"
In law, it often means "in practice but not necessarily ordained by law" or "in practice or actuality, but not officially established."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_facto
I think IW is confused...
(Or misquoted!)
Posted 11 years ago # -
Yeah, he's saying it's all the fault of the English and it'll all be better after independence.
Posted 11 years ago # -
No, he is saying it is a nasty, backward little dump and it is just as well not to give it or the powers-that-be within it any more power.
But then that is not the fault of the Scottish Government so Independance is a different issue.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Oh no hang on, you are saying that IS what he actually said but it is not what he meant to say?
Sorry, I am confused by all the confusion.
Shame, it was funny as it was.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Hmm. Here's how I interpret it.
He says: "Surely the state of Edinburgh as a tatty, run-down museum, economically and culturally stagnant, devoid of the vision and focus a true capital city needs"
Which I read as: "Yes, Edinburgh is a dump and not like a true capital city".
He says: "is precisely why it needs to be a de facto capital, not languishing in its weary, second-rate, neither-fish-nor-fowl status."
Which I read as: "But that's why it needs to a real (his mistaken de facto) capital and not the half-way house it is at the moment".
He says: "It’s a bit like not allowing Andy Murray to hold a tennis racket, then saying he’s probably not good enough to compete at Wimbledon."
Which I read as: "Edinburgh will only be a true capital city when it has the full autonomy of being the true capital of an independent country."
Posted 11 years ago # -
A quick search has settled it - he does support Independance. From I believe, Chigago.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Chicago - far enough away he wont have to endure the mess the MSP's will undoubtedly make of the whole thing, or pay the taxes, and instead can watch Braveheart on a loop tape and wear a lot of tartan...
Very patriotic.Posted 11 years ago # -
Well, in my (*weeps inwardly*) 20 years in Edinburgh I'd say the city has improved dramatically. A lot of that is undoubtedly down to the investment that's come into the city on the back of the
gravy trainParliament and its attendent cashflows. Yeah, there's a lot of things that could be done better and it's still got a long way to go, but it's in better nick than a lot of cities.Nice of Foreign Policy to provide the helpful caveat at the end of the article that Prof Williams is the author of a book called "Sex and Buildings"...
Posted 11 years ago # -
Could Edinburgh be better? Yes.
Could Edinburgh be much better? Yes.
Is Edinburgh a nice place to live? Yes. Generally.
Are there far worse places that I (we?) couldn't imagine living? Yes. Definitely.Like the Right Honourable Member for Fountainbridge, the Member for the People's Republic of Leith Central of course has to follow the work and the money if that's what he wants, but he will find he loses touch with the reality of Edinburgh and becomes a parody of himself, harping on about the moneyed arts-and-culture-aristocracy at the same time as accepting their champagne reception and advances on his next novel.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Yeah, there's a lot of things that could be done better and it's still got a long way to go, but it's in better nick than a lot of cities.
Which ones?
Posted 11 years ago # -
Aberdeen, Glasgow, Sheffield, Birmingham, Swansea, Manchester, Nottingham, Portsmouth.... (some based on hearsay, others I've been to, that are worse places to live in or cycle in or both in than Edinburgh).
Edit: Leeds, certainly the last couple of times I've been and walked around the centre and out to the cricket ground, it's not looked like aparticularly pleasant place to cycle.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Which ones?
Hull. Perhaps.
Actually, just came back from weekend in Manchester. My brief synopsis was; nice tram system (a proper, on-street "network".), so interesting attempts at useful cycling provision, like cut-through lanes at the 4-way junctions to let cyclists avoid red lights, and terrifyingly reckless driving. Felt like I was taking my life in my hands every time I stepped out. Saw a number of drivers swerving and acccellerating towards pedestrians trying to cross roads and a number of prangs in the few hours I was on the streets to / from the hotel / convention centre. Traffic speeds seemed far higher than Edinburgh, even though it's largely a grid system, everyone floors it from junction to junction and slams the brakes on at the next red light.
It was also dirty, noisy, full of loud, aggressive drunks and had endless boarded up all-you-can-eat chinese Buffets. Some nice old buildings though, truly impressive town hall.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Aberdeen, Glasgow, Sheffield, Birmingham, Swansea, Manchester, Nottingham, Portsmouth.... (some based on hearsay, others I've been to, that are worse places to live in or cycle in or both in than Edinburgh).
The question was not whether there are better places to walk or cycle but whether Edinburgh is really in "better nick" which means - are there places that are more manky and crumbling than Edinburgh? Swansea and Aberdeen are definitely not and Glasgow town centre has improved a great deal in the last few years so that when you arrive there on the train or bus it looks great and not a dump.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Fair enough. I'd still rather live in Edinburgh than any of the others listed.
Posted 11 years ago # -
The city centre is Edinburgh's sore point. Crap, unimaginative development lead by a crap, unimaginative council who think a couple more Primark stores will tart up Princes Street. But then again, which are the cities without crap, unimaginative councils who will sell their own grandmothers and waive through contrary to their own planning regulations to have a few more chain coffee shops and "exciting, vibrant, retail opportunities"?
One of the real charms of Edinburgh is the wider areas outside the city centre - my experience of quite a few UK cities is that outside the nice centres where there's been a lot of investment and regeneration and there are fancy buildings, you can very quickly get into the badlands. I don't feel like that at all in Edinburgh.
Posted 11 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
