Anne McCall writes:
What a complete contrast to yesterday. Hardly a camera crew in sight and those members of the public who did turn up dwindled to single figures by the end of the day. This is the kind of planning inquiry I'm more used to - not glamorous, not in the least like an episode of Perry Mason but long days carefully examining, cross examining and re-examining mountains of detailed paperwork (sounds great doesn't it?).
In most inquiries the developer gives evidence first, then their supporters and finally the objectors so we have quite a long wait before our witnesses take the stand. Today it was the turn of Dr Martin Hawtree, the chap who designed the golf course for Trump International.
As you'll know if you've looked at our webpages about the application (sometimes called the Menie development but perhaps more widely known as the Trump proposal) this is the part of the application which causes us real concerns because in order to build it they'll have to severly damage a protected site - a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).
Dr Hawtree's evidence was pretty interesting, not least because chunks of what he said completely contradicted what Mr Trump said yesterday. We had been reassured by Mr Trump that he'd asked both the golf course designers he'd used to come up with plans avoiding the SSSI but that having looked at that option they'd found it unsatisfactory - Mr Hawtree made it clear he hadn't.
However, that didn't stop the applicants trying to dismiss the proposal we've submitted to the inquiry (have a look at it here: http://www.rspb.org.uk/ourwork/conservation/sites/scotland/menie.asp) which shows that it is entirely possible to build an 18 hole, championship, links course in this location without destroying the protected site or important areas to the south. Neither Mr Trump not Dr Hawtree seemed very interested in entertaining that option.
Most of the rest of the day was taken up by various bits of economic evidence where we found out that the Trump International had been advised by one of their economic specialists that doing this inquiry was going to cost them around £1million. In case your worried about what we're doing with your membership fees I can promise you we won't be matching that kind of expenditure. The same consultant also said that given the chance 'developers would develop anything that moved....or rather didn't move' - possibly a little more candid than he intended to be.
Tomorrow it's the turn of the Council and maybe the Chamber of Commerce which will both be interesting but I suspect not quite exciting enough to attract the crowds back. Given that the room we were in today had been reduced to half the size it was yesterday I'm slightly concerned that by the end of this four week inquiry we'll be sitting in a small cupboard.