Should demolition of buildings be used as entertainment?

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
14 April 2014 Last updated at 14:59 Magazine Monitor A collection of cultural artefacts One of the 30-storey blocks of Red Road flats was demolished last year Plans to demolish five tower blocks as part of the Glasgow Commonwealth Games opening ceremony have been scotched. Is it appropriate for demolitions to be turned into public spectacles, asks Finlo Rohrer.

The five well-known blocks at Red Road will still be demolished. But this particular revolution in Glasgow's social housing will not be televised.

There was the threat of protests, a group letter from architects in Glasgow and a former MSP Carolyn Leckie, who criticised "the disrespect displayed by blowing up homes for entertainment". Her petition attracted thousands of signatures.

There have been many occasions when big demolitions using explosives - known colloquially as "implosions" - have been presented as entertainment. In February, about 30,000 gathered in Frankfurt to witness the controlled demolition of Frankfurt's university tower, one of the biggest demolitions ever carried out in Europe. Thousands gathered in 2000 in the streets near Seattle's Kingdome sports arena when it was blown up. When, in 1995, the Landmark Hotel in Las Vegas was blown up, it featured in the movie Mars Attacks.

"The Americans do love an implosion, particularly around Las Vegas - every implosion of a hotel is a major event," says Mark Anthony, editor of Demolition News. There are TV crews and a kind of carnival atmosphere in some cases. "There are people in many countries who will travel thousands of miles to see one."

The 31-storey Landmark Hotel, which was built in 1961, was imploded in 1995

But in the UK, the phenomenon is much less spectator-led, suggests Anthony, although that's not to say that many haven't enjoyed the impressive sight of a block collapsing in on itself.

Architect Maxwell Hutchinson wrote that during the great wave of demolition of 1960s tower blocks, "picnic parties sat on London's Hackney Marshes as tower after tower exploded and crashed into a pile of wasted idealism and dreams".

But in the case of Red Road, it's wrong to have demolition as entertainment, says Miles Glendinning, professor of architectural conservation at the University of Edinburgh. "The proposal filled me with horror and disgust." The planners of previous eras may have made mistakes, with hindsight, but they often had good motives, he suggests.

There's no doubt that when the five towers are eventually demolished some spectators will gather. But Anthony will not be among those who are impressed by the sight. "I'm probably a bit jaded because I've seen so many," he says.

Follow @BBCNewsMagazine on Twitter and on Facebook

View the original article here

CPS should pay legal bill - MP Evans must visit

Nigel Evans told the Mail on Sunday he considered suicide in his "darkest moments" MP Nigel Evans, who was cleared of rape and sexual assault on Thursday, has said the Crown Prosecution Service should pay his £130,000 legal bill.

The former deputy speaker of the House of Commons told the Mail on Sunday the case had cost him his life savings.

He called the case a "very public execution attempt", and said rules granting anonymity to alleged victims of sex crimes were unbalanced.

The CPS has said taking Mr Evans to court was the "right decision".

Mr Evans told the newspaper he had considered suicide in the "darkest moments" since allegations against him were made.

Mr Evans said nothing would be the same for him again after the trial

The MP for Ribble Valley said his £130,000 legal bill had taken up his entire life savings, adding: "Every penny is gone."

The case also cost him the £30,000-a-year extra salary he had received as deputy speaker.

People who were "dragged through the courts through no fault of their own" and then found not guilty should "get their legal fees back from the CPS budget", Mr Evans said.

"Maybe that will make them focus on whether a case is worth pursuing."

Defendants acquitted in England and Wales can apply for their legal costs to be reimbursed from "central funds" - the taxpayer rather than the CPS - up to the amount of legal aid that would have been provided.

Mr Evans also hit out at the police, saying he had been "shocked" by their "zealotry" in pursuing the investigation.

And he questioned the way prosecutors handled high-profile sex offence cases that dated back many years - also criticising the use of "bundling" - where police build a case against an accused using a number of weaker allegations.

"We need to consider the issue of a statute of limitations and look at how other countries deal with this," he added.

The MP questioned the current system of anonymity for alleged victims of sexual offences, saying he felt "cheated" that his accusers would not be recognised in the street while he would - even though he had been cleared.

He said the system created a "new set of victims" when those accused were acquitted.

"This imbalance needs to addressed urgently," he said.

'Cheated'

And in a separate interview with the Sunday Mirror he said he would not seek to return to his deputy speaker role, focusing instead on being a constituency MP.

He says the plan had been for Eleanor Laing, the new deputy speaker, to step aside when he was cleared so he could be re-elected.

"But I don't want another contest," he told the newspaper.

"I enjoyed the role for three years but Eleanor is making a great fist of doing the job.

"For the rest of this Parliament I am going to return to the back benches and carry on what I did when I was elected."

On Friday, Director of Public Prosecutions Alison Saunders defended the decision to prosecute Mr Evans and said the CPS applied the "same test no matter who the offender or the victim is".

"We looked at all the evidence and decided there was a realistic prospect of conviction," she said.

And Lancashire Police has defended its "fair, professional and proportionate" handling of the case.

Det Supt Ian Critchley said the force had pursued Mr Evans in the same way it would anyone else.

Speaking on Sky News, deputy Labour leader Harriet Harman said Mr Evans had been through a "harrowing" experience but added that there should not be anonymity for those accused of sexual offences.

She added that the CPS acted "independently", saying: "People say they should never have taken this case in the first place. Our system is that the jury decides."

But Conservative MP Nadine Dorries said: "It's an absolute travesty what's happened to Nigel Evans."

She added that the CPS had been on a "fishing expedition" and that Mr Evans was "a good bloke".

View the original article here

MPs 'should not police themselves'/must visit

Maria Miller has apologised to MPs for her attitude MPs should no longer have the power to police their own standards and ethics, the watchdog in charge of parliamentary expenses has said.

Sir Ian Kennedy's comments come after Culture Secretary Maria Miller apologised and was ordered to repay £5,800 in over-claimed mortgage costs.

Speaking to the Sunday Times, Sir Ian said an end to the current system was "the only way forward".

MPs "marking their own homework always ends in scandal", he said.

Continue reading the main story

To avoid further damage to Parliament in the future, it should have the confidence to give away powers in regulating itself ”

End Quote Sir Ian Kennedy Ipsa chairman The Conservatives say Mrs Miller's apology has drawn a line under the issue.

But Labour has said Mrs Miller and Prime Minister David Cameron have "serious questions" to answer.

'Great progress'

The row dates back to December 2012 when the Daily Telegraph reported that Mrs Miller had claimed £90,718 in expenses towards mortgage payments on a house in south London that the MP shared with her parents.

The parliamentary commissioner who conducted the initial investigation into Mrs Miller's expenses ruled she should repay £45,800.

However, this was cut to £5,800 by the House of Commons Committee on Standards, which is mostly made up of MPs.

Sir Ian chairs the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa), which was set up in 2009 to manage MPs' pay and expenses.

Mrs Miller's mortgage claims were made before Ipsa took over and her case "couldn't happen under Ipsa", he said.

He said "great progress" had been made under the new regime, put in place after the MPs' expenses scandal.

Maria Miller apologised to MPs for her attitude towards an inquiry into her expenses

But he went on: "There is a lesson from Ipsa which ought to be learnt with the Commissioner for Standards too.

"She should be given the freedom to carry out her work and not have her wings clipped by MPs.

"To avoid further damage to Parliament in the future, it should have the confidence to give away powers in regulating itself and see that independent regulation is the best, most transparent way forward."

The BBC's political correspondent Gary O'Donoghue said Ipsa had always had a "frosty relationship" with most MPs.

'Straight answers'

Labour said Mrs Miller and the PM should say "what they knew" about a call to a Telegraph reporter from the culture secretary's special adviser Jo Hindley in December 2012, in which she referred to Mrs Miller's involvement in deciding press legislation.

The Daily Telegraph said the reference to the Leveson inquiry into press regulation had been made to persuade it to back away from getting "straight answers" about Mrs Miller's expenses.

In the tape, Ms Hindley said another reporter had "doorstepped" Mrs Miller's father, who had just come out of hospital, at the south London house.

"Maria has obviously been having quite a lot of editors' meetings around Leveson at the moment," she added.

"So I'm just going to flag up that connection for you to think about."

Labour's shadow leader of the Commons Angela Eagle said both Mrs Miller and the prime minister needed to make clear what they knew about the call and what they did about it.

She said the recording raised "serious questions", including whether there had been a breach of the code of conduct for special advisers or the ministerial code.

'Attitude'

Meanwhile, emails released by the Commons Standards Committee revealed Mrs Miller told the commissioner investigating her that she might go over her head to ask MPs to intervene.

In one email, Mrs Miller said: "It may be that I shall need to refer this to the supervisory jurisdiction of the standards committee but I hope this can be avoided."

In another, she said a decision to uphold the complaint would be "irrational", "perverse" and "unreasonable".

In its report on Tuesday, the committee said Mrs Miller's submission of "incomplete" evidence to the inquiry had breached the MPs' code of conduct.

In addition to ordering her to repay £5,800, the committee said she should also apologise to MPs "for her attitude to the commissioner's inquiries".

Mrs Miller made her apology on Thursday, which the Conservative Party said had drawn a line under the incident.

View the original article here