OIL tycoon Sir Ian Wood has made a desperate plea to city councillors in Aberdeen not to vote against the controversial City Garden Project as it once again comes under threat.
Sir Ian spoke out as the Labour-led administration said it was confident it would win enough support at a crunch vote next week to scrap the project, which would have transformed Union Terrace Gardens.
The entrepreneur had showdown talks this week with council leaders, and was told of the forthcoming vote by Labour group leader Barney Crockett.
Labour has always been against the proposals to create a square which is to be a "cross between a grand Italian piazza and a mini-Central Park" despite a referendum in February in which 52% of the public voted for the redevelopment.
The talks came after Labour emerged as the largest council group after last week's election and agreed a joint administration with the Conservative and Independent Alliance groups on Thursday.
A Labour source said: "We have had discussions with Sir Ian and we have a difference of opinion, there is no doubt about it. We will now move to get rid of the project. It will happen sooner rather than later."
It is believed the motion will be discussed and voted on at Wednesday's full council meeting. Labour said it was "absolutely" sure it had enough support within the new chamber to win an open vote on the issue.
However Sir Ian, who pledged to donate £50 million towards the scheme to raise the Victorian gardens to street level, said: "Jennifer (Craw, from Wood Family Trust) and I visited the leader of the Labour group Barney Crockett and Councillor Willie Young on Thursday where they made it clear they wanted the see the City Garden Project abandoned and they would use their 17 votes to block the project.
"So now I ask the people of Aberdeen to talk to your councillors, please make your views known, ask them why they should go back on the results of the referendum."
During the discussions on Thursday, Sir Ian revealed he received no explanation from Labour leaders as to why they will vote against the project.
He said: "They asked if we would withdraw financial support. We replied that we believed Aberdeen City Garden Trust had been given a clear mandate by the council following the referendum at the end of February and after discussion with the council officials, the project is effectively under way.
"What was really disappointing was the lack of explanation of why they should disregard the referendum vote."
Sir Ian said: "45,300 people voted to go ahead with the garden out of a total of 86,000 votes – whereas only 16,200 voted for Labour in the recent local government elections.
"I was very disappointed, particularly when bearing in mind this is a decision with really significant implications for the future generations in the city."
The public referendum in March returned a majority of 4106 in favour of the scheme.
A leading backer of the plan, Tom Smith, chairman of Aberdeen City and Shire Economic Futures, said scrapping the project would bring "democracy and integrity" into question. He added: "To drop the City Garden would be a major missed opportunity for Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire."
Independent Alliance group leader Marie Boulton said: "I have not made a firm decision about this, however it would be foolhardy to rush ahead without looking at the financial aspects and the impact on other cultural and recreation facilities."
Tory group leader Fraser Forsyth said: "We remain in complete support of the City Garden Project and we would vote in favour of it.
"But we are also aware of the political realities – and there are far more pressing issues facing the city."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article