Botanics tree-huggers await world record confirmation

treehugAn attempt to break the world tree-hugging record in Inverleith is now in the hands of international adjudicators. 1387 people took part in the world record attempt during the successful Midsummer event at the Botanic Gardens on Saturday evening – but a rival attempt in faraway Nepal is keeping the Scots huggers in suspense!

RBGE’s website blog Botanics Stories explains: ‘At 8pm an air horn sounded the start of a one minute tree hug on the evening of midsummer 2014 at the Botanics. The weather was overcast, but pleasantly warm. For the duration of the tree hug the Garden went quiet. Then the horn sounded for a second time, and as quickly as it had died away the gentle sound of conversation and laughter returned.

The participants signed a sheet to act as evidence in this world record attempt and we now know that the total number of people involved was 1,387. The youngest was just seven months.

Whether this will turn out to be a world record is unclear as an unofficial world record was set in Nepal recently that involved 2,000 people. This record will only be accepted if the supporting evidence can be provided. If it cannot then the Botanics tree hug would represent the current world record. We will be following this up and keeping our fingers crossed.

A big thank you to all those who took part.’

As all you professional treehuggers out there will know, the current world record for the largest tree hug was set in the USA by Treecology Inc and Hoyt Arboretum in Portland, Oregon, on 20 July 2013 – 936 people took part that day.

We know that record’s now been broken, but was that Nepalese attempt valid? It’s now an anxious wait – Inverleith’s Botanics, or Kathmandu? As the world holds it’s breath, Guinness world record adjudicators – it’s over to you!

huggers

Join Sainsbury’s Big Jump!

sby

I’m writing to let you know about a fantastic sporting event taking place at Sainsbury’s Blackhall on Thursday 3 July to promote the Sainsbury’s Glasgow Grand Prix, which takes place at Hampden Park on 12 and 13 June.

The event will see some of the world’s greatest athletes take part in the two-day competition, including double Olympic champion Mo Farah, Olympic long jump champion Greg Rutherford and one of the fastest men of all time, Yohan Blake. The Grand Prix is part of Sainsbury’s Summer Series, which is made up of five fantastic athlete and para-athlete events taking place across the country.

In the run-up to the Glasgow Grand Prix, we’re holding a sporting competition called ‘The Big Jump’, in four Sainsbury’s stores across Glasgow and Edinburgh. The events will see a full-size long jump track set up in our Sainsburys Blackhall car park on 3 July between 10am and 4pm. Throughout the day, we’ll be encouraging customers to take part. 

Every participant will be entered into a free prize draw to win a family ticket to the Grand Prix and have the chance of taking part in a special ‘Sainsbury’s Long Jump’ event at Hampden Park on 11th July.

The event is free and it’s the first time we’ve ever held a sporting activity like this across our Scottish stores. It’s a great opportunity for children and their families to come along and be part of ‘The Big Jump’.

If you require any more details about the event, please call me on 0131 332 0704 or e-mail prl.blackhall@sainsburys.co.uk. We will also be advertising this event in-store.

Many thanks for getting involved in ‘The Big Jump’!

Gail Wilson

Sainsbury’s Blackhall

What a state – rivals clash over start-up costs

flags

An independent Scotland would face immediate start-up costs of between £150 – £200m, according to a new report produced for the Sunday Post by an independent academic think tank. The Scottish government says the report – Transitioning to a New Scottish State – ‘blows  Treasury figures (of £270m) out of the water’, but UK Treasury sources insist the Scottish government  ‘can’t be trusted’ on the cost of independence.

Report author Professor Dunleavy, from the London School of Economics, said an independent Scotland could have to spend between £150m to £200m on new administrative structures to replace existing UK bodies. He explained that although an independent Scotland could share UK bodies during the transition to independence, it would have to build its own systems by 2021 – costing of hundreds of millions of pounds.

Prof Dunleavy also warned that a hostile approach from the UK government in post-Yes negotiations could “greatly add” to the cost.

The key points from the paper include:

  • Immediate set up costs of up to £200m to create new versions of existing UK bodies
  • The total would increase if UK ministers take a “hostile stance” in post-Yes negotiations
  • The costs could be offset due to Scotland having a “smaller government machine”, spending less on areas such as defence
  • The initial expenditure should be seen as an investment which will save on future running costs
  • The long-run viability of an independent Scotland is “generally high”

NicolaSturgeonMSP20110510[1]

Welcoming the report (see link below), Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said: “I welcome Prof Dunleavy’s report as it totally vindicates the Scottish Government’s position on how we can complete the governmental transition to a fully independent Scotland. It makes clear how the initial start-up costs would be much less than the UK Government have sought to claim.

“The report points out that much of the UK structure of government quangos and agencies is highly elaborate and long-lived and that the Scottish Government would not need all these bodies, while there is also good evidence that government IT systems in small states around the size of Scotland are generally cheaper and more effective than with the scale of the UK state.

“And while the report judges the realism of the Scottish Government’s planning for independence to be generally high, it suggests that some of the demands for cost data made upon us at this stage would require “the prophetic powers of the Delphi oracle”.

“The report also makes clear that the main cause of uncertainty around Scotland’s transition to independence lies with a lack of UK Government planning so I urge UK Ministers, in line with the Edinburgh Agreement, to engage with us in sensible pre-referendum discussions. As we move closer to this exciting referendum on our country’s future, the people of Scotland deserve nothing less.”

HM Treasury

Westminster, however, insists that the Scottish government can’t be trusted to give Scots the facts on the costs of setting up a new Scottish state. Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander wrote:

“This week it was revealed that Alex Salmond has asked his officials to cobble together a report on the costs of setting up a new Scottish state.

“It comes after almost three weeks of confusion and misinformation from the Scottish government. At one point the First Minister seemed to pull out a number out of thin air, claiming that the cost of setting up a new state was around £200 million.

“Another time we had to listen to Salmond’s finance minister John Swinney fail to answer a direct question on set up costs 13 times during a live radio interview.

“That is when they really descended into farce, making up a hotchpotch of excuses: saying that their analysis on this issue was “ongoing”, that they were not doing any more work on it, or that the costs would not be known until after the referendum.

“It is totally implausible that the Scottish government have done no work on the cost of setting up a new state – particularly after John Swinney told his cabinet colleagues, in his secret memo two years ago, that the work was “currently underway in Finance and OCEA to build a comprehensive overview of the institutions, costs and staff numbers which I will draw together”.

“I suspect any rushed last-minute exercise is mainly an attempt to distract journalistic attention from seeking the paperwork the Scottish government are desperate to keep secret until after polling day.

“Alex Salmond has belatedly recognised his responsibility to provide some real facts in this important debate. This is just what we in the UK government have been doing for the past 18 months, to help inform voters in Scotland ahead of the referendum.

“While they are finally doing the work they promised would be done two years ago, it is disappointing that they’re only doing it because they’ve been found out to be completely clueless on the matter. I believe there are two reasons why we should take any of their work on this issue with a big pinch of salt.

“First, because we all know that previous Scottish government analysis has often been short in real facts, and rather muddied the waters rather than helped make the situation clearer, we will need to scrutinise any new findings. In particular:

  • will it reflect the cost of setting up a new tax administration system? Independent experts at ICAS have pointed out that less complex changes than this are costing £750 million in New Zealand
  • will it include the cost of setting up a new welfare and benefits delivery department? According to research from the Department of Work and Pensions a new welfare and pensions IT system alone would cost between £300 million and £400 million
  • will it put a cost on a new diplomatic network? The European and External Relations Committee last week called for the Scottish government to give the set up costs of this
  • will it include the cost of producing a new currency?
  • what about the cost of setting up a new defence capability?
  • what about the 180 public bodies that the Scottish government themselves say (in page 363 of their white paper) will need to transfer their functions to new or existing bodies in Scotland?

“These are some of the questions that will need answering. It seems to me that if reorganising Scottish local government in the mid-1990s cost £281 million, and building the new Queensferry Crossing cost £1.4 billion, then setting up a whole new state for less than that doesn’t really sound credible.

“The second test we need to apply is about the Scottish government’s general approach to key questions regarding the referendum. If it took all this pressure to get them to admit that they were looking at set-up costs then, what else are they hiding?

“Time and time again they keep rushing their analysis through, producing flimsy research with little independent backing. When it suits them they assume the most unrealistic and optimistic assumptions. As Professor Piachaud of the London School of Economics explained in an open letter last month: “I am however certain that the evidence put forward to support the claim that Scotland, as a smaller but independent nation, could expect to grow faster simply does not stand up to scrutiny.

“This is why I am still left with a feeling that you cannot really trust them – they will say anything to try and stack up their numbers. Compare that to our approach – project fact – providing thorough and detailed analysis of the relationship between the UK and Scotland.”

Transitioning-to-a-new-Scottish-state-PD-ebook