19th September 2018
Established 1872. Online since 1996.

New appointment to Shetland Charitable Trust

10 comments, , by , in News

The latest addition to the Shetland Charitable Trust is the Rev Tom Macintyre, who was appointed as a trustee on Thursday and replaces Stephen Morgan.

The Rev Tom Macintyre is the latest member of Shetland Charitable Trust.

The Rev Tom Macintyre is the latest member of Shetland Charitable Trust.

Mr Macintyre’s appointment brings the charitable trust up to its full complement of 15.

He said that since coming to Shetland eight years ago, he has been involved in the life of the church as a minister of the Church of Scotland and felt he could contribute to the charitable trust.

He said: “Since coming here I’ve taken a strong interest in the community and economic life of Shetland.

“I think the formation [of the trust] of having independent trustees with a variety of backgrounds and professions as well as elected members gives a broad spectrum of contributions for the Shetland community.”

The charitable trust’s chairman is Bobby Hunter, with councillor Jonathan Wills as vice-chairman.

Other councillor trustees are convener Malcolm Bell, Allison Duncan, Robert Henderson, Andrea Manson, Drew Ratter and Amanda Westlake.

The remaining trustees are Keith Massey, James Smith, Ian Napier, together with three recent appointments in the form of Tom Morton, Peter Malcolmson and Andrew Cooper.

About Rosalind Griffiths

I am a Shetland Times reporter covering news, including health stories, and features. I have been in Shetland for more than 30 years.

View other stories by »

10 comments

  1. David Spence

    I just hope the new trustee’s to the Charitable Trust see well beyond dollar signs and the quick buck mentality to which the Viking Energy Project eludes to, and will cause immense damage to the future of the Charitable Trust, but more so the Charitable Trusts ability to help Shetlander’s and Shetland, instead of putting all your energy (money) into 1 money drainage scheme which will have very little benefit to Shetland, economically, environmentally and the long term prospects of tourism.

    Shetland has far greater values than just it’s weather and this of wind. We have music, beautiful scenery, beautiful wildlife, beautiful traditions in crafts and arts and many other aspects money cannot even touch.

    Put the islands first, and not the narrow-minded, short visioned few who only think of themselves and what they can gain at the cost to the people and the islands of Shetland.

    There is far greater value in life than there ever will be in the man-made concept of money, greed and wealth.

    Reply
  2. iantinkler

    My goodness me, what a surprise!! Another dyed in the wool Viking Energy supporter. Nothing like having a balanced view about a major issue. One time I will say it, Thank God for the Tories being in Government in Westminster and at least, whatever they are, they are not close minded about destroying our environment for the Green Goddess of concrete and steel. Our rural landscape may not be destroyed after all . Just proves every cloud has a silver lining ll. Come on OFGEM, scrap the £1 billion interconector. No subsidies for further onshore wind developments, will never be cost viable, just a speculative wast of money, rather like VE.

    Reply
  3. David Spence

    Ian, I am very intrigued, if the VEP does not go ahead due to the ridiculous costs, if those involved in the VEP directly will pay back to Shetland the £11 million plus they have received for associated administrative costs and, get this, paying VEP Staff a wage for a business that is not even remotely got off the ground?

    No doubt, they most probably will not………….but they should be made accountable for the monies they have borrowed………even if it means, like crimes, all assets they may to contribute to the paying off the loan.

    Reply
  4. john irvine

    I would like to see where all the £millions that has vanished into VE has been spent on, a break down would make a very interesting read.

    I suspect those who could provide this would be unwilling to reveal the truth.

    Reply
  5. Michael Garriock

    Well, that’s a right bunch. The planned bankruptcy of the SCT is set to contine apace, if not faster than already planned.

    By the way, whose decision at The Shetland Times was it to bury the news in a small box along the bottom page 15 of the paper, that the SCT decided on Thursday to reduce their disbursements by the sum of £2 Million in monetary terms by 2020. Sharing a page with Court reports, fund raising for a small rural hall, and the SHB’s aspirations for their dental service. Surely confirmation of an over 20% reduction in disbursements from a local charity of the stature of the SCT merits a slightly higher news profile?

    Reply
  6. Donnie Morrison

    With the appointment of the Rev Macintyre to the SCT it would appear that they have almost achieved their objective of creating a viable breeding population for Viking Energy. I await with interest to see what odious child this unholy copulation brings forth.

    Reply
    • David Spence

      LOL Fantastic description, Donnie.

      Reply
  7. David Spence

    I fully agree with John and Michael, in short, there has been no accountability by the VEP on how much monies has actually been used on the project to this of fattening the bank accounts of the ‘ so-called ‘ employee’s of such a project.

    As the solicitor of Sustainable Shetland said at a meeting held in the auditorium of the Museum recently, hosted by BBC Radio Shetland, and what I have been requesting for some time, asking that there should be a public inquiry into how and why the SCT got involved with the VEP. As well as this, who within or outwith the SIC advised the SCT to invest in such a project.

    Putting it very basically, the figures do not add up, the return for the SCT is ridiculously small and the running costs, not to mention (Her Majesty’s Treasury were wanting £55,000, I believe, a year for a fibre optic cable from Shetland to mainland Scotland) the cost of having, a very much larger, a cable from Shetland to mainland Scotland. I very much suspect Her Majesty’s Treasury will be wanting a lot more than £55,000 a year for a cable lying on the seabed.

    How many other hidden costs are VE not telling the Shetland public, and what are the real costs going to be?

    Reply
  8. Kathy Greaves

    The Shetland Charitable Trust’s AGM is to be held this Thursday, 11.30am, in room 12 at Islesburgh. I still see no mention of VE at all on their website, we need to know how much money is being spent, and on what, in relation to this project. We must not forget that the Trust was ~”set up to benefit the inhabitants of Shetland. Our aim is to provide public benefit and to improve the quality of life for the people of Shetland, especially in the areas of:

    – Social care and welfare
    – Arts, culture, sport and recreation
    – The environment, natural history and heritage

    I don’t see where Viking Energy’s giant windfarm fits into any of those categories.

    Reply
  9. Rachel Buchan

    I think that SCT, instead of standing for ” Shetland Charitable Trust”, should stand for “Shetland Crony Trust”.

    Reply

Your Comment

Please note, it is the policy of The Shetland Times to publish comments and letters from named individuals only. Both forename and surname are required.

Comments are moderated. Contributors must observe normal standards of decency and tolerance for the opinions of others.

The views expressed are those of contributors and not of The Shetland Times.

The Shetland Times reserves the right to decline or remove any contribution without notice or stating reason.

Comments are limited to 200 words but please email longer articles or letters to editorial@shetlandtimes.co.uk for consideration and include a daytime telephone number and your address. If emailing information in confidence please put "Not for publication" in both the subject line and at the top of the main message.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.