Heart of Midlothian War Memorial

[Jack Alexander]

On behalf of the MB Trust I have attended several meetings on the subject of the Heart of Midlothian War Memorial's place in the reorganisation of the Haymarket junction. Rightly or wrongly, I've consistently reported the impression that the Tramway people (whatever they might actually say) perceive the structure as something of a ?nuisance? that could usefully be relocated elsewhere.

 

Initially I believe that some officials were of the opinion that it had served its purpose and that (with the Great War is so far in the past) it could be safely ?downgraded? in terms of its visibility and physical prominence. I took an opposing position and defended it as vigorously as diplomacy and politeness would allow.

 

For our most recent meeting (2 September) suspecting that something might be afoot, I invited Alan Owenson (secretary of the MB Trust) to accompany me. As a career civil servant, Alan is particularly well-versed in the workings of public bodies.

 

Before this meeting we were left with one (almost) concrete proposal. As part of the redevelopment of Haymarket Station and its surrounding pedestrian concourses, the Memorial would be placed on the paved area in front of Ryrie?s public house. This seemed like an excellent solution, allowing the tower to remain ?at home? in its traditional architectural context, beside the landmark buildings which have always formed its backdrop.

 

On 2 September, however, we were taken aback to learn that the Council officials had an alternative suggestion ? confirming, I think, the fears that I had harboured since the start of these ?consultations?. We were handed a document entitled ?Hearts Memorial Clock?, which envisages the permanent removal of the memorial to a site (an alien environment, if you will) in Atholl Crescent. This idea was dressed up in some rather ill-conceived promises of new space, to ?tell the story? and to hold the annual ceremony of Remembrance (which they persistently described as a ?celebration? ? much to Alan?s annoyance).

 

In fact this proposal would sideline the clocktower to a meaningless location in which its aforementioned prominence and visibility would be dramatically compromised. My response, supported by Alan, was that the Memorial is an historic Edinburgh landmark, set in an important historic physical context, and that it was placed in the junction by its creators to be seen. I added that if, after the Tramway has been laid, it can return to the junction, the McCrae?s Trust would wish to see it do so. Relocation to any other site is unacceptable. We expressed the hope that the Football Club and its supporter organisations would share this view.

 

The important point here was made by the Council officials. They conceded (under questioning) that it could, indeed, be returned to a position on the traffic island ?one metre away? from its present position. But (importantly) that they would rather not put it there! They repeated this three times.

 

In spite of their insistence that they were opening a ?consultation process? we were left with a strong impression that they have already made up their minds.

 

Note that in addition to the possibility of returning the clocktower to the traffic island, there still remains the ?second? Haymarket option. Funding for the station redevelopment has yet to be confirmed by the Government. When this goes through, they explained that there will be sufficient funds to relocate the Memorial to the Council?s originally suggested site, in front of Ryrie?s. It occurred to me that the Football Club and its supporter bodies might look into the costing of this proposal with a view to calling the Council?s bluff by raising funds to pay for the landscaping themselves. In any case I think the fate of the Heart of Midlothian Memorial is too important to be tied into a project as large as the station plan. The two should not be linked.

 

In summary, we appear to have something of a battle on our hands. The officials' grasp of the significance of the clocktower is worrying. Notwithstanding repeated use of the word ?celebration?, their insistence that in Atholl Crescent the Memorial would form part of the start of a new city-wide ?statue heritage trail? was ill-judged.

 

I pointed out (with Alan?s support) that the other monuments in the Council?s list merely commemorated the lifework of individuals. The Heart of Midlothian War Memorial commemorates two five-year events of such historic and emotional enormity that the idea of uprooting the structure from its ninety-six-year-old home is verging on the sacrilegious.

 

In February 2009 the clocktower will be removed to allow tramway work to be carried out in the junction. This is unavoidable. Assuming that we can resist the Atholl Crescent proposal, the tower (we are told) must remain in storage until March 2011 (at the earliest). I?m not sure that we should be taking the officials' word on these timings, by the way. At any rate, this means that we will ?lose? two memorial services ? 2009 and 2010. The Council's suggestion is that a temporary stone be placed (in Atholl Crescent, of course!) as a focus for these two Remembrance Sundays. They admitted that there was no budget available for this, but supplied mock-up photographs, none the less.

 

For the life of me, I can?t see what Atholl Crescent has to do with anything at all. I would suggest that on those two Sundays the Club has a number of more appropriate alternatives ? which might include a service in Grosvenor Street, a service in the Lawnmarket (at the Heart of Midlothian) or a service at Tynecastle.

 

I know that we have to be seen to work with the Council, but it would appear that some junior planner with no knowledge of the history and no appreciation of the facts has dredged up Atholl Crescent as an afterthought.

 

For what it's worth, I think we owe it to the men and women who built the memorial to show a bit of pride in the sacrifice of their generation. We should hold the temporary services on a spot that we think is fit and of which they would approve. Messrs McCartney and McCrae (if they were here) would pick up the baton and tell the Council where the services should be held ? not meekly surrender to official opinion. That point, I have no doubt, will be well discussed over the coming months!

[Craigieboy]

The idea of moving the clock out of Haymarket permanently is shocking.

 

It should be fought all the way.

 

.

[Francis Albert]

Confirms the suspicions, raised on the other thread, following a not very difficult reading between the lines of the Evening News article.

[Jack Alexander]

Very interesting Jack, thanks for the update.

 

Would you suggest writing to any elected member in particular to show our opposition to the compromise options being pushed at us?

 

Are the local press interested in picking this up. That could be a VERY productive way of publicising this. Good work to everyone who continues to battle to have the memorial kept in its rightful place.

 

By all means, Borthers, raise the matter with your local representative. Or write to the Council. There will have to be a formal planning application to permanently relocate the clocktower - that's certainly a stage where we could mobilise opposition. Assuming, of course, that the HMFC community agree that it's a bad thing and are united enough to take action.

 

As for the newspapers, I'm sure they will see this as a running story. The Council officials' account of the recent 'consulatations' were a bit naughty - assuming, of course, that they were being quoted accurately!

 

I can only repeat that our reaction to Atholl Crescent ("Coates Crescent" according to one of the officials in the News) was total opposition - expressed firmly, politely and quite unmistakably. Anyone who suggests otherwise is guilty of misrepresentation.

[CJGJ]

As usual the use of the term 'the greater good' will come to the fore -- an excuse for second rate planners and officials to put the needs of the tram and the council reputation in front of 'the right thing'.

 

Sometimes we need to realise that we have to accept that we have a duty from past events and whether we think they are relevant today or not, accept that a responsibility has been passed down to our and future generations.

 

Rather than hope that responsibility will just go away we need to embrace it and incorporate it into plans -- this was a part of the tram process that should have been incorporated in to the tram plans rather than thought of as an 'add on' or 'best fit' once the tram lines were laid.

[Jack Alexander]

Sometimes we need to realise that we have to accept that we have a duty from past events and whether we think they are relevant today or not, accept that a responsibility has been passed down to our and future generations.

 

Rather than hope that responsibility will just go away we need to embrace it and incorporate it into plans -- this was a part of the tram process that should have been incorporated in to the tram plans rather than thought of as an 'add on' or 'best fit' once the tram lines were laid.

 

That's a particularly perceptive and wise posting, CJGJ. I couldn't have put it better myself.

[rumbles1874]

i think we must do everything in our power and get people in power to back us, the clock was there before these fools where a glint in the daddy's eyes!!! with Alex sammond being a hearts fan then am sure he would not want to see the clock moved. with the so many people attending the service every year surly we can get the enough backing to stop the memorial moved to any unsuitable spots

[CJGJ]

That's a particularly perceptive and wise posting, CJGJ. I couldn't have put it better myself.

 

Feel free to use it in any future meetings -- I do hope that this process can be stopped before the usual bandwagon of officialdom takes over.

[Rods]

With the generation getting near the end of its life.

 

This monument should hold more significance.

 

The council need to be yold of this fact.

 

What about an email to Vlad about the current situation.

[Therapist]

with Alex sammond being a hearts fan then am sure he would not want to see the clock moved.

 

Fat Alex is an oily self-publicist, not a Hearts fan. This was proven conclusively in a thread from a few weeks ago. He's been nowhere near Tynecastle since nineteen oatcake.

[Meadows]

Have the club a) been consulted by the council expressed a desire for a temprary site c) indicated a preference for a relocation site

 

Surely the club should be heavily involved,no disrespect to JA & his commitee,but Heart of Midlothian Football Club should be orgainising this in conjunction with the council.

[JamboJay]

I have scootled about the internet to investigate the coonsils plans for Haymarket and the Memorial Clock and came up with a schedule of public meetings/exhibitions that the Tram folk are having to explain their routing and "record comments of the public" the pdf doc listed below gives the details. But if it doesn't work then the date & location is Tues 23rd (1700 to 2000) at Clanish Hall St George's Church Shandwick Place, also on Thursday 25th same place same time

 

http://www.tramtime.com/newdownloads08/trafficregulationdesinexhibitionsforweb.pdf

 

I reckon if we go along and let them know how we feel, in a polite, temperate but firm way, it might not make any difference but it cetainly won't do any harm.

 

FWIW I am in favour of the trams, I wont go into details why here, its not the place, but the trams and the Memorial clock have shared the space in the past (30 years or so) there's no reason they can't again.

 

All power to Jack Alexander in his protestations but we can all do our bit

[Jack Alexander]

Have the club a) been consulted by the council expressed a desire for a temprary site c) indicated a preference for a relocation site

 

Surely the club should be heavily involved,no disrespect to JA & his commitee,but Heart of Midlothian Football Club should be orgainising this in conjunction with the council.

 

The temporary site (in principle and in detail) is the Council's idea. No request or suggestion came from the Football Club. I understand that HMFC have been invited to a separate consultation meeting (as - again separately - were the MB Trust and the Federation). I imagine that once that meeting has taken place, the club will be in a position to respond to the proposals.

 

Also, the McCrae's Battalion Trust is not 'my' committee. I am outnumbered by Hearts supporters and representatives of both the Football Club and the Royal Regiment.

[Jack Alexander]

I have scootled about the internet to investigate the coonsils plans for Haymarket and the Memorial Clock and came up with a schedule of public meetings/exhibitions that the Tram folk are having to explain their routing and "record comments of the public" the pdf doc listed below gives the details. But if it doesn't work then the date & location is Tues 23rd (1700 to 2000) at Clanish Hall St George's Church Shandwick Place, also on Thursday 25th same place same time

 

 

I reckon if we go along and let them know how we feel, in a polite, temperate but firm way, it might not make any difference but it cetainly won't do any harm.

 

FWIW I am in favour of the trams, I wont go into details why here, its not the place, but the trams and the Memorial clock have shared the space in the past (30 years or so) there's no reason they can't again.

 

All power to Jack Alexander in his protestations but we can all do our bit

 

It's not just my protestations, JamboJay.

 

Anyway there's a real irony in the Council's choice of venue. You really couldn't make this up. St George's West was the home for many years of the much-loved chaplain of McCrae's Battalion, the Reverend Jimmy Black.

 

Jimmy was a Hearts supporter, no mean footballer himself. He served with Sir George's lads in the front line, sharing the danger and the deprivation. Out of the line, he took part in their kickabouts and was remembered as a 'flying and dangerous' winger. After the war he presided over several services of Remembrance at the Haymarket Memorial.

 

Now I'm simply not worthy to speak for this remarkable gentleman. But, if he was here today, I do not believe that he would have anything good to say for the Atholl Crescent proposal.

[coppercrutch]

The temporary site (in principle and in detail) is the Council's idea. No request or suggestion came from the Football Club. I understand that HMFC have been invited to a separate consultation meeting (as - again separately - were the MB Trust and the Federation). I imagine that once that meeting has taken place, the club will be in a position to respond to the proposals.

 

Also, the McCrae's Battalion Trust is not 'my' committee. I am outnumbered by Hearts supporters and representatives of both the Football Club and the Royal Regiment.

 

HMFC are currently in negotiations with the Council regarding them having to cough up cash for part of the Tram works stop 'near' Tynecastle.

 

I imagine that may be relevant to this discussion ?

[Seymour M Hersh]

HMFC are currently in negotiations with the Council regarding them having to cough up cash for part of the Tram works stop 'near' Tynecastle.

 

I imagine that may be relevant to this discussion ?

 

I wold imagine he cooncil will include the clock as leverage in the stand planning permission as well.

[blairdin]

Fat Alex is an oily self-publicist, not a Hearts fan. This was proven conclusively in a thread from a few weeks ago. He's been nowhere near Tynecastle since nineteen oatcake.

 

Sorry Therapist, but IMHO this isn't an appropriate thread for airing your well known political views.

 

Alex Salmond opposed the Edinburgh Trams and I actually believe he would take an interest in this. I've always connected he memorial clock with McCraes Battalion as a whole - as a kid, that is how dad explained it to me. I think I'm right in saying that wreaths are laid from clubs all over Scotland who have links with McCrae, not just Hearts. For that reason alone politicians football sympathies or otherwise are not relevant. And for that reason alone there is a responsibility to ensure the memorial clock remains in a prominent location and not a West End sidestreet garden.

 

I was all for accepting the council proposal of a temporary memorial stone in Atholl Crescent whilst the work at Haymarket was being completed, but not now if it will be perceived by city planners as some back door acceptance of a permanent home for the clock.

 

I don't know the best way forward, but I would support any campaign launched to secure a future for the memorial clock at Haymarket.

[coppercrutch]

I wold imagine he cooncil will include the clock as leverage in the stand planning permission as well.

 

Was thinking the same, however if they do that would be rather poor IMO.

 

A War memorial should be held on a different level to a tram stop. I would hope HMFC point this out to the Council.

[Seymour M Hersh]

Was thinking the same, however if they do that would be rather poor IMO.

 

A War memorial should be held on a different level to a tram stop. I would hope HMFC point this out to the Council.

 

CC we're talking about politicians here. They're one rung above child molesters on the the ladder of life imho. Low-life dirt bags the lot of them. Only in politics for their own gain.

[Bomber Harris]

Ryries - are you having a bubble mate

[coppercrutch]

CC we're talking about politicians here. They're one rung above child molesters on the the ladder of life imho. Low-life dirt bags the lot of them. Only in politics for their own gain.

 

True. Although a a fair few in the Council are known to be Jambos so let's hope they use their 'own gain' for something positive for a change.

 

As for the trams don't even get me started...

[Buffalo Bill]

Jack, thanks for the heads-up; a very worrying situation.

 

Do you happen to have the names (or better still - email addresses) of the cardigan-wearing council officials you were dealing with?

 

Maybe we could all send them our well wishes regarding them making their final decision?

 

 

 

Buffalo Bill

 

.

[Jack Alexander]

Jack, thanks for the heads-up; a very worrying situation.

 

Do you happen to have the names (or better still - email addresses) of the cardigan-wearing council officials you were dealing with?

 

Maybe we could all send them our well wishes regarding them making their final decision?

 

 

 

Buffalo Bill

 

.

 

It's not going to strengthen our case if we start vilifying individuals who are (after all) only doing their jobs. There's a bigger picture. On behalf of a generation that is no longer here to defend the Memorial, we have to maintain our dignity (their dignity) and the respect of all the divergant parties if we are to succeed in our aim of preserving the clocktower in its present historic setting.

 

An old lady (whose father was killed on the first day of the Somme) once told me that the paving stones around the clock were holy ground - stained (and she was not dramatising in any way) by the tears of those families of the 'honoured dead' who gathered there one morning every year.

 

I don't share a bloodlink to McCrae's, or (knowingly) to anyone else in the Hearts community who is commemorated by the Memorial, but I understand precisely what she meant.

 

The Memorial was placed there to be seen - to represent the awful sacrifice of the men (and women) that it remembers. The folk who built it placed their trust in us to look after it when they were gone. Personally I wouldn't want to let them down.

[Dave Ross]

No way we can allow this to happen.

 

Can't see the problem, the clock does not take up that much space and the service is only once a year.

[Father Tiresias]

The memorial is shown here on the Edinburgh Interchange proposal right outside Ryrie's. Why have they decided this is no longer a suitable location?

[Jack Alexander]

The memorial is shown here on the Edinburgh Interchange proposal right outside Ryrie's. Why have they decided this is no longer a suitable location?

 

 

See below, Chizzy. Extract from my original posting.

 

"Note that in addition to the possibility of returning the clocktower to the traffic island, there still remains the ?second? Haymarket option. Funding for the station redevelopment has yet to be confirmed by the Government. When this goes through, they explained that there will be sufficient funds to relocate the Memorial to the Council?s originally suggested site, in front of Ryrie?s. It occurred to me that the Football Club and its supporter bodies might look into the costing of this proposal with a view to calling the Council?s bluff by raising funds to pay for the landscaping themselves. In any case I think the fate of the Heart of Midlothian Memorial is too important to be tied into a project as large as the station plan. The two should not be linked."

[joe.gausden]

Should Foukes not be raising something in parliament about this. Is McClechie (sp) still involved in politics that he couldn't help with this fight. What about Cardownie & co in the council, surely they will be willing to lend political support to the fight.

[Andrew Gilbert Wauchope]

The memorial is shown here on the Edinburgh Interchange proposal right outside Ryrie's. Why have they decided this is no longer a suitable location?

 

Well spotted, Chizzy. And the wording below states "Other iconic landmarks include Ryrie?s public house and the Heart of Midlothian War Memorial, the original location of which would be restored by these proposals." (My emphasis). Someone clearly has decided to ignore or change this.

 

You might think it a wee bit Orwellian .....

[Jack Alexander]

Well spotted, Chizzy. And the wording below states "Other iconic landmarks include Ryrie?s public house and the Heart of Midlothian War Memorial, the original location of which would be restored by these proposals." (My emphasis). Someone clearly has decided to ignore or change this.

 

You might think it a wee bit Orwellian .....

 

At our 2 September meeting, Alan and I were told by the senior official that this was never a 'formal' proposal, merely part of a visual impression of the junction after reconstruction.

 

I must say, however, that it seemed pretty formal to me when it first appeared as a crucial and 'iconic' part of the much-vaunted recent 'public consultation' on the three suggested models for Haymarket Station and its approaches.

 

Incidentally it was another official of TIE who first allowed me (and others) to believe that this was an actual concrete part of an actual concrete plan - at a lengthy presentation at the Grosvenor Hotel. Not only that, but the drawings and elevations are still available for scrutiny in TIE's official leaflets (of which I retained several) and on the Internet.

 

I do get the feeling that some members of that organisation are making up the story to suit themselves as they go along.

[Coco]

At our 2 September meeting, Alan and I were told by the senior official that this was never a 'formal' proposal, merely part of a visual impression of the junction after reconstruction.

 

I must say, however, that it seemed pretty formal to me when it first appeared as a crucial and 'iconic' part of the much-vaunted recent 'public consultation' on the three suggested models for Haymarket Station and its approaches.

 

Incidentally it was another official of TIE who first allowed me (and others) to believe that this was an actual concrete part of an actual concrete plan - at a lengthy presentation at the Grosvenor Hotel. Not only that, but the drawings and elevations are still available for scrutiny in TIE's official leaflets (of which I retained several) and on the Internet.

 

I do get the feeling that some members of that organisation are making up the story to suit themselves as they go along.

 

The only important thing for TIE was to spend as much money and con as many councillors as quickly as possible. That secured their juicy salaries on this line.

 

Those juicy salaries and contracts now secured, the Council is now in financial peril about this tram line. They have an open ended and unlimited liability for the extra costs as they overrun, and they are seeing the developer 'contributions' melt away as the property market goes sour.

 

Anything that the Council/TIE can do to reduce what they see as extraneous costs will now be done. Things like the Memorial are irrelevant to them.

[Deevers]

Well spotted, Chizzy. And the wording below states "Other iconic landmarks include Ryrie?s public house and the Heart of Midlothian War Memorial, the original location of which would be restored by these proposals." (My emphasis). Someone clearly has decided to ignore or change this.

 

You might think it a wee bit Orwellian .....

 

My grandad was the Superintendent of the City Roads Department in McLeod Street for many years where the clock was stored during one of the revamps of the traffic systems in Haymarket in the 1950's or 60's. He always maintained that even at that time there were individuals on the council that wanted the memorial removed permanently from Haymarket, even in those days.

 

Common sense and decency prevailed at the time and the clock was re-erected at the Haymarket. I suspect that only really happenned because at that time there were still many survivors of WW1 around at the time - and they still carried a vote in elections. Personally, I would not trust the present council in Edinburgh as far as I could throw them. One only hopes that common sense and decency will prevail again. Voters with an interest in this matter should ensure that councillors both Liberal and SNP in the ruling coalition on the council just now are aware of the consequences for them of such a ill conceived move. They after all are the people who make the decisions - not the faceless officials in the Roads Department.

[Charlie-Brown]

Money talks - there won't be a happy outcome regarding this matter as far as Hearts fans are concerned and either the memorial will be moved to a less than satisfactory location in terms of it's historical location and/or Hearts (the football club) will be fleeced for tramline contributions with the memorial location being used as just another piece of negotiating tactics used by the council as part of the planning process - my gut feeling is Romanov won't be bullied or bribed in this manner regards tramline contributions and would rather hold out until a change of administration than pay the 'tram-tax'.

[The Old Tolbooth]

It worries me somewhat that these types of decisions are made by people who have absolutely no clue whatsoever about how this memorial came about in the first place, if indeed my fears are comfirmed by these peoples ignorance, then I don't hold out much hope for Jacks cause I'm afraid.

[Father Tiresias]

See below, Chizzy. Extract from my original posting.

 

"Note that in addition to the possibility of returning the clocktower to the traffic island, there still remains the ?second? Haymarket option. Funding for the station redevelopment has yet to be confirmed by the Government. When this goes through, they explained that there will be sufficient funds to relocate the Memorial to the Council?s originally suggested site, in front of Ryrie?s. It occurred to me that the Football Club and its supporter bodies might look into the costing of this proposal with a view to calling the Council?s bluff by raising funds to pay for the landscaping themselves. In any case I think the fate of the Heart of Midlothian Memorial is too important to be tied into a project as large as the station plan. The two should not be linked."

 

That would indeed force them into a corner.

 

Have you taken advice on the cost of rebuilding the memorial?

[Andrew Gilbert Wauchope]

It worries me somewhat that these types of decisions are made by people who have absolutely no clue whatsoever about how this memorial came about in the first place, if indeed my fears are comfirmed by these peoples ignorance, then I don't hold out much hope for Jacks cause I'm afraid.

 

This is not just Jack's cause - it is a cause that is, or should be, dear to all who care for the people for whom the memorial was built. And that is not just the Hearts family, as has been pointed out here.

 

There are far too many pointless arguments and squabbles on JKB sometimes. But this kind of issue is surely what discussion boards were made for. The fact that it is wider than just Hearts means that we have an immense power, if we can mobilise it and use it. This is above mere club loyalites, so the fans of Hibs, Raith Rovers and those other clubs who share the memory of McRae's Battalion should be brought into this.

 

If it can't be resolved before the planning application stage, we should ensure that thousands of objections flood into the Council Planning department. I work in a planning department and I've seen the effct this has. It is certain that the one thing to worry even elected members is the voices of people objecting. One or two are cranks; several are concerned; thousands are ward seats disappearing at the next election.

 

We have strength in numbers, across the whole of central Scotland. We can and should make it count.

[Jack Alexander]

That would indeed force them into a corner.

 

Have you taken advice on the cost of rebuilding the memorial?

 

That would be presumptious of me, chizzy. It's not really my business to do that. Or the business of the MB Trust. The Football Club and its official supporter groups are in a slightly different position, however.

 

It was just a suggestion off the top of my head.

 

The drawings that were released as part of the Haymarket Station consultations show a raised embankment with a wall sheltering the side that faces into the junction. The construction of that layout, together with the cost of re-assembling the Memorial (a cost that will have to be met by the Council wherever it goes) would be expensive - especially the preparatory planning process and the use of the very finest labour and materials.

 

I believe that if opposite Ryrie's is the best option we should try to bring everyone together and work towards it as soon as possible. I dislike the idea of the Memorial becoming the centrepiece of an unseemly disagreement between competing interest groups and financial 'imperatives'.

 

It's worth more than that.

[Ulysses]

Sorry, bit of a long post coming up.

 

It's obvious that there's a real problem here, and that it will take quite an effort to ensure that the Memorial - and the memory of the men whose sacrifice it honours - is not downgraded by Edinburgh City Council.

 

For that effort to succeed, I think we need three things:

 

• To be clear and realistic about what we want to achieve;
   
  
• To try to achieve it in the right way;
   
  
• To get as many people as possible to support our efforts to achieve it.

 

Before discussing each of those points, I want to make something clear. When I say we, I mean we - people who support Hearts, people who care about the Memorial and what it stands for, and people we know who might feel the same way. If we don't get involved and have our say, then we are leaving it to the likes of Edinburgh City Council and the current management of HMFC to decide the future of the Memorial. If we leave them to decide that, then be under no illusions - something will happen that we will regret.

 

What we want to achieve

It's important to be clear and realistic about what we want to achieve. For a start, it's obvious that the Memorial will be moved temporarily, so there's no point in making unreasonable demands about that. Similarly, it may turn out that for sound reasons the Memorial can't be reinstalled at its exact location, and if so we shouldn't be unreasonable about that. Also, we shouldn't be too scattergun in our thinking about what should happen to the Memorial. We shouldn't let ourselves be distracted by different ideas about where it will be placed, how it will be done and who will be responsible for doing it.

 

It seems to me that there are three linked objectives that most people would agree on. Firstly, we want the Memorial reinstalled as close to its original location as possible. Secondly, if it isn't possible to do that, we want it placed in Haymarket - because Haymarket is the right setting from an architectural and historic point of view. Thirdly, the location of a temporary stone at Atholl Crescent is unacceptable because it will cause almost inexorable pressure to locate the permanent Memorial there. For this reason, the best location for the temporary stone - and therefore the 2009 and 2010 services - is in Haymarket.

 

How to achieve it

First of all, we simply cannot rely on the Council or the management at HMFC to deliver the right result. As far as I can see, the Memorial is a very low priority for the Council. Even if it was a priority for them, they would be unwilling to admit it because they would see it was a "HMFC issue" and would not want to be seen to be favouring one club in the city over the other. I reckon the memorial is a very low priority for Vladimir Romanov and the management at Hearts - and they will be especially quick to abandon any pretence of concern if it costs them money or delays progress in developing Tynecastle. Also, it's not fair to expect the McCrae's Battalion Trust to carry this alone. The Trust doesn't have enough people on the committee to do this, as I'm sure Jack will confirm. And in any case the Trust already has much to do in its mission to educate and inform people about the sacrifice of the 16th Royal Scots, and to maintain and develop the memorial at Contalmaison.

 

So this is something that we'll have to work on ourselves. A starting point would be to get an action group together - and I'm sure the Trust would be a willing participant in this. The group should work on publicising the Council's plans to downgrade the Memorial and the memory of the men it honours, and letting people know why it is so important to preserve the Memorial in the right locations. The group should also lobby the Council to persuade it of the importance of the Memorial and what it stands for, and to convince the Council that proper commemoration of the sacrifices made in the Great War are still important even if they have faded out of living memory. The group should also make sure that the management at Hearts are in no doubt that the Memorial is important to our supporters. Last, but not least, the group should explore appropriate political, PR and legal avenues to ensure that the Memorial is reinstalled in the right location.

 

Getting public support

Ultimately, this is a political and PR battle, so public support is crucial to put pressure on the Council. There's no point in assuming that people will automatically support what we want to achieve. Some people (sadly) won't regard the Memorial as being important. Others will see it as important, but will go along with the inappropriate plans of the Council to relocate it to Atholl Crescent. And people who aren't Hearts supporters will regard this as a "Hearts issue", and therefore not relevant to them.

 

So the group needs to figure out ways to make people aware of why the Memorial is important as a commemoration of a crucial part of Edinburgh's history, why it is relevant whether or not you are a Hearts supporter, and why the Council's plans for relocation are inappropriate. Where politicians, officials or other public figures might be supportive, their support should be enlisted regardless of political or footballing colours. And in that regard, I don't think there's anything to be gained by us throwing out insults and invective about politicians and officials.

 

 

As I said already, it will take a lot of effort to stop the Memorial from being relocated in the wrong place - or worse, being mothballed. The above is an attempt to set out what might be involved and how we might go about it. But to re-iterate what I said earlier, we can't rely on others to solve this problem for us.

[scott herbertson]

Sorry, bit of a long post coming up.

 

It's obvious that there's a real problem here, and that it will take quite an effort to ensure that the Memorial - and the memory of the men whose sacrifice it honours - is not downgraded by Edinburgh City Council.

 

For that effort to succeed, I think we need three things:

 

• To be clear and realistic about what we want to achieve;
   
  
• To try to achieve it in the right way;
   
  
• To get as many people as possible to support our efforts to achieve it.

 

Before discussing each of those points, I want to make something clear. When I say we, I mean we - people who support Hearts, people who care about the Memorial and what it stands for, and people we know who might feel the same way. If we don't get involved and have our say, then we are leaving it to the likes of Edinburgh City Council and the current management of HMFC to decide the future of the Memorial. If we leave them to decide that, then be under no illusions - something will happen that we will regret.

 

What we want to achieve

It's important to be clear and realistic about what we want to achieve. For a start, it's obvious that the Memorial will be moved temporarily, so there's no point in making unreasonable demands about that. Similarly, it may turn out that for sound reasons the Memorial can't be reinstalled at its exact location, and if so we shouldn't be unreasonable about that. Also, we shouldn't be too scattergun in our thinking about what should happen to the Memorial. We shouldn't let ourselves be distracted by different ideas about where it will be placed, how it will be done and who will be responsible for doing it.

 

It seems to me that there are three linked objectives that most people would agree on. Firstly, we want the Memorial reinstalled as close to its original location as possible. Secondly, if it isn't possible to do that, we want it placed in Haymarket - because Haymarket is the right setting from an architectural and historic point of view. Thirdly, the location of a temporary stone at Atholl Crescent is unacceptable because it will cause almost inexorable pressure to locate the permanent Memorial there. For this reason, the best location for the temporary stone - and therefore the 2009 and 2010 services - is in Haymarket.

 

How to achieve it

First of all, we simply cannot rely on the Council or the management at HMFC to deliver the right result. As far as I can see, the Memorial is a very low priority for the Council. Even if it was a priority for them, they would be unwilling to admit it because they would see it was a "HMFC issue" and would not want to be seen to be favouring one club in the city over the other. I reckon the memorial is a very low priority for Vladimir Romanov and the management at Hearts - and they will be especially quick to abandon any pretence of concern if it costs them money or delays progress in developing Tynecastle. Also, it's not fair to expect the McCrae's Battalion Trust to carry this alone. The Trust doesn't have enough people on the committee to do this, as I'm sure Jack will confirm. And in any case the Trust already has much to do in its mission to educate and inform people about the sacrifice of the 16th Royal Scots, and to maintain and develop the memorial at Contalmaison.

 

So this is something that we'll have to work on ourselves. A starting point would be to get an action group together - and I'm sure the Trust would be a willing participant in this. The group should work on publicising the Council's plans to downgrade the Memorial and the memory of the men it honours, and letting people know why it is so important to preserve the Memorial in the right locations. The group should also lobby the Council to persuade it of the importance of the Memorial and what it stands for, and to convince the Council that proper commemoration of the sacrifices made in the Great War are still important even if they have faded out of living memory. The group should also make sure that the management at Hearts are in no doubt that the Memorial is important to our supporters. Last, but not least, the group should explore appropriate political, PR and legal avenues to ensure that the Memorial is reinstalled in the right location.

 

Getting public support

Ultimately, this is a political and PR battle, so public support is crucial to put pressure on the Council. There's no point in assuming that people will automatically support what we want to achieve. Some people (sadly) won't regard the Memorial as being important. Others will see it as important, but will go along with the inappropriate plans of the Council to relocate it to Atholl Crescent. And people who aren't Hearts supporters will regard this as a "Hearts issue", and therefore not relevant to them.

 

So the group needs to figure out ways to make people aware of why the Memorial is important as a commemoration of a crucial part of Edinburgh's history, why it is relevant whether or not you are a Hearts supporter, and why the Council's plans for relocation are inappropriate. Where politicians, officials or other public figures might be supportive, their support should be enlisted regardless of political or footballing colours. And in that regard, I don't think there's anything to be gained by us throwing out insults and invective about politicians and officials.

 

 

As I said already, it will take a lot of effort to stop the Memorial from being relocated in the wrong place - or worse, being mothballed. The above is an attempt to set out what might be involved and how we might go about it. But to re-iterate what I said earlier, we can't rely on others to solve this problem for us.

 

Very well reasoned and written post Ulysses

 

I agree with everything you say.

 

One thought is that there would be no more powerful PR than a photograph of some of the descendants of those who died in McCrae's Batallion beside the clock, preferably including children who are descendants. Emotionally manipulative but effective.

 

Local press love this sort of photograph and accompanied by a press release it would force a response I am sure.

[Andrew Gilbert Wauchope]

Ulysses' message seems to pretty well sum up the concerns and issues. I'd support such a group.

 

So, to start, a simple question back to Ulysses - can this be a sticky topic, so that it's never out of sight of anyone who even occasionally visits JKB?

[piltonjambo]

Have to say that this 'Council think' has been coming for a few years now guys ... less and less respect been paid by the authorities on the remembrance day event in my opinion ... I wrote this letter to the News two or three years ago on the subject

 

Show more respect for the city's fallen

I FEEL I must write and record my continued disgust at the lack of respect being shown with regard to the Remembrance service by the authorities in Edinburgh.

Allowing the traffic to converge on to the Haymarket junction at 11.05 is not only unacceptable and unsafe but shows a complete disregard to this service and its attendees. The service concluded at approximately 11.20, but it may have as well been 11.05 due to the noise of the passing traffic, very few people would have heard the service from then.

Surely it is not beyond the wherewithal of the local authorities to divert the traffic for 45 minutes to allow this service to go ahead in a respectable manner?

If it were anything to do with the Edinburgh International Festival, this would not even require to be raised; it would be seen as a necessity which required no debate.

At the moment the present situation is appalling, it shows a complete disregard and contempt for a very important event in the city of Edinburgh and is seen by visitors to the city as Edinburgh's disgrace.

Perhaps the supporters of this service should take matters into their own hands by campaigning through their respective clubs for a massive turnout of members and physically block the junction, then we may be able to pay our respects properly to those who made the ultimate sacrifice for us.

 

 

Time for all Hearts fans to really start attending this event in very large numbers and 'jacking up' the pressure on the Council to not only retain what we want but improve on what they have been 'allowing' recently

[Francis Albert]

I agree with pretty much everything in Ulysses post. Except that I wouldn't write off the current HMFC management (ie Vlad) quite so readily. Whatever his faults he has continued CPR's (whatever his faults!) recognition of the importance of the memorial and the annual remembrance service. I am sure Vlad would welcome the fight.

 

And however stupid and insensitive the council and its officials may be, I think they will steer clear of opening themselves to the suggestion that they were using the memorial as a bargaining counter in the planning application for Tynecastle.

[Ulysses]

Except that I wouldn't write off the current HMFC management (ie Vlad) quite so readily.

 

That point of mine might have been a bit unfair. I think it's more reasonable to say that we should be proactive rather than assuming that the club and the Council will come up with the result we'd like to see.

[Ulysses]

Ulysses' message seems to pretty well sum up the concerns and issues. I'd support such a group.

 

So, to start, a simple question back to Ulysses - can this be a sticky topic, so that it's never out of sight of anyone who even occasionally visits JKB?

 

For now, I think we should let this thread run for a bit and then sticky the topic. Sometimes, we've noticed that stickied topics actually get less views than ongoing debates that are near the top of the board.

 

Also, the management team at JKB will do what we can to support efforts to publicise the issue, and to help a group to be set up and to co-ordinate its work.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

It's time for a massive PR campaign on this issue. We are approaching the 90th anniversary of the first armistice this year and for an Edinburgh landmark to the fallen of that war to be under threat is a disgrace, particularly since it's over a vanity project like the trams.

 

Every newspaper should be contacted immediately and all the political parties should be lobbied too. The SNP, for one, can use the angle about having to fund the trams in the first place over the parliamentary vote. Labour and Conservative, on the other hand, can use this to have a go at the SNP and Lib Dem coalition in the City Chambers. We should also contact every media outlet in the UK about this and further afield if necessary.

 

If the clock has to move to another location in the junction then that's fine but to even suggest that it has to go is beyond the pale. This is not just about HMFC, there is a vital principle at stake here.

[The Old Tolbooth]

This is not just Jack's cause - it is a cause that is, or should be, dear to all who care for the people for whom the memorial was built. And that is not just the Hearts family, as has been pointed out here.

 

 

Apologies, I didn't mean to make it sound like one mans plight against the council, I probably should have worded it better

[Maple Leaf]

The short-sightedness of bureaucrats and elected officials never fails to amaze me. The suggestion that the memorial has fulfilled its purpose is absurd beyond belief, as the service every November 11 proves.

 

What's next? Let's remove Nelson's column from Calton Hill as the ships in the Forth don't pay any attention to the dropping ball anymore?

 

After its temporary relocation, the memorial should return to Haymarket, as close as possible to its original location. Any other suggestion is an enormous disservice to the memory of the men who died and their families.

 

I commend Jack and his associates from the MB Trust for their efforts in raising public awareness about this situation. As mentioned by Ulysses, the management team at Jambos Kickback will assist this efffort in every possible way.

[Gibbo]

The following is from The Scotsman of 10 April 1922 in its report of the unveiling of the memorial:

 

'Mr William C. Burns [an HMFC director], in asking the Lord Provost to accept the memoial, remarked upon the sympathy and generous spirit with which the Corporation [i.e. the Council] had seconded the Club's efforts to erect the memorial. The Lord Provost formally accepted the offer, promising that the memorial would be "preserved with all reverence and honour in all coming time."'

 

I've not posted a link to the fulla rticle as it's on a pay website so doing so mught get JKB into trouble with The Scotsman.

[redm]

Could these people really be any more out of touch? To say their proposals are disappointing would be a huge understatement - they're demonstrating nothing but a complete lack of regard for the history and significance of the memorial, and for those to whom it means so much. While they might be forgiven on an individual basis (grudgingly!) for perhaps not knowing as much about the story as many others, I think it's disgraceful that those delegated to formally manage this issue have demonstrated such an obvious lack of interest and knowledge of the subject.

 

I couldn't agree more that awareness needs to be increased on this issue in order to attract the attentions of those who make the decisions, but also to ensure that they fully appreciate the significance of this memorial and its history. Keeping this sort of thing in the mind of the public is never going to be easy but in this case, I think there's no doubt that considerable numbers would be interested to hear what the council have in mind. Whether or not they can be motivated to express their displeasure is another thing though.

 

As someone else mentioned earlier, it's hugely important that any or all efforts made to do this reflect the magnitude of the issue but also the dignity which characterises the events and people at the heart of the story itself. And it's a story that doesn't require screaming and shouting to work on its behalf...it's powerful enough to generate a reaction without that. I'm 110% behind any plans to raise awareness of this and more than willing to provide an extra pair of hands if required.

[murdo_b]

I agree with most of the comments it must stay in its original location.

I would think getting some well known Hearts and football fans involved would generate some publicity and put the pressure on the council.

Some names i can think of are Chris Hoy, Nicky Campbell (5 live) Salmond,Foulkes and the Mcletchie.

[Andrew Gilbert Wauchope]

I agree with most of the comments it must stay in its original location.

I would think getting some well known Hearts and football fans involved would generate some publicity and put the pressure on the council.

Some names i can think of are Chris Hoy, Nicky Campbell (5 live) Salmond,Foulkes and the Mcletchie.

 

I have made the point that we should widen the campaign to include supporters of other clubs. I still think this is imperative, to avoid being depicted as "just a bunch of Jambos". However, unless we can make a clear link to McCrae's Battalion, we're going to struggle. The Haymarket memorial is understood by most to be a Hearts memorial, erected and paid for by Hearts supporters. Enthusing the present-day supporters of Raith Rovers, Falkirk, Dunfermline and Hibs will require us to make a clear link between the memorial and the battalion, I think. If we can make that link clear in their minds, we can draw on the famous supporters of the other clubs as well.

 

And then perhaps we could get the Proclaimers to write a campaign song.....?