Sir, – There is a large body of evidence that suggests that when big national or multi-national retailers move into a town they have a detrimental impact on local business and the environment.
They are said to force the closure of locally-owned and run businesses; result in an increase of empty premises in the high streets; take the profits from the business and distribute them to shareholders outside of the local community; create only poorly-paid part-time jobs.
On the other hand, local businesses provide a dynamic and attractive environment in the town.
The profits are spent locally, therefore, generating further wealth in the local community.
If we needed any more proof of these lessons then we only have to look at two articles in your July 16 issue.
JD Wetherspoon are planning to open a branch in Forfar and we read that the Queen’s Hotel (locally-owned and managed) is now up for sale. Equally unsurprising is the article about the boss of Wetherspoon bleating about the rise in the minimum wage announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Big national chains undermine local businesses by paying low wages and often employing people on minimum-hours contracts with poor terms and conditions. How many times must this happen in our local towns for the planning authorities and the powers that be to realise that
inviting and encouraging branches of big nationals and international companies is, in the long term, detrimental for local communities?
If the trend continues then we will face a future when every high street will look the same: charity shops, empty premises and branches of big companies.
It is not a future I look forward to.
Brian Batson. 7 Lour Road, Forfar.
Get Scotland back to work
Sir, – I travelled from Markinch to Edinburgh on ScotRail on Tuesday July 14.
On checking the arrivals/departure board at Markinch, it indicated that five services between Edinburgh and Dundee, or vice versa, had been cancelled in the afternoon.
The reason given was crew shortage.
With an unemployment rate of 5.9%, what an indictment on our country that we cannot run a transport service due to lack of staff.
Should our government not be trying to put our own house in order, before we try to govern the UK and beyond?
Perhaps fox hunting is more important?
Jack Harley. 9 Mackie Crescent, Markinch.
Predictable outcome
Sir, – I see from your issue of July 16 that Mr Ellis of DF Concerts seeks, rather pathetically, to explain that his disastrous event needed a magician to have got everything right in the first year.
Even after the hammering issued in the press and social media in the last few days he clings to the view that, apart from a few teething troubles, it was a resounding success. This is not a view shared by party goers queuing for hours for buses or struggling along unlit roads in the dark.
Writing as a property owner on the north side of the site, I was closely involved with DF Concerts staff and although a formal objector I tried to co-operate as far as possible. Every issue that caused the disaster was foreseen by local residents and every time assurances were given that it had been covered. The reality proved different.
Mr Ellis should face up to having made the wrong choice for his new site and seek the help of his magician to return to Ballado where he will be assured of a warm welcome.
James Mowat. Cruive Cottage, Kinkell Bridge.
Concentrate on home priorities
Sir, – I could never accept that the SNP were able so easily to take over the Scottish Saltire as their own and make Scots ashamed to display our national flag for fear of being called nationalist.
A further insult was the attempt to take over the white rose from the Jacobite rebellions as their own.
Along with this comes the distortion of titles for political purposes such as bedroom tax for benefit reduction and worse still are insulting acronyms such as EVEL to describe the solution to the age-old West Lothian Question.
This definition, in my opinion, borders on being racist as it refers to the English and their rights to govern their own country.
I would have thought this policy would appeal to the Scottish National Party in view of their own demands for autonomy.
I am, therefore, very curious as to the motives of the nationalist party to demand a say in the government of another country when their priorities should be here in Scotland where we are experiencing declining standards in all our services, particularly within Police Scotland.
Alan Bell. Roods, Kirriemuir.
What if tables were turned?
Sir, – The SNP are having loads of fun with the English votes on English matters situation, with the English fox hunting amendment being played about with by the 56 .
But that could backfire. Just imagine if an English MP, perhaps a cabinet minister, was to put down a parliamentary motion to ban all salmon fishing in Scottish rivers, and the Conservatives, with their majority of 12, forced through a naughty bit legislation using English votes on a Scottish matter.
Colin Cookson. Hatton Green, Stenton, Glenrothes.
Party with chips on shoulders
Sir, – I do not agree with Alex Orr and his rant against the terrible Tories.
The SNP has the Holyrood powers to improve the lifestyles of Scottish families by the means of education, health improvement and job-creation through investment, but chooses instead to expend its energies on political game-playing on constitutional matters.
Would it not be a nice change to see this political party with its numerous elected MPs at Westminster actively doing something tangible in Scotland instead of generating enough wind to power all of Scotland’s windfarms, politicising every issue of life and blaming the
Conservative Party for everything that the SNP itself has failed to do.
The SNP gives the increasing impression of having more chips on its shoulders than you would find in an Anster fish supper.
Derek Farmer. Knightsward Farm, Anstruther.
We can look after ourselves
Sir, – Two letters (July 16) highlight the difference between individuals who, like myself, aspire to Scottish self-government and supporters of continued Westminster control.
Andrew Collins, in the former camp, states clearly that “better government” is the goal and points to countries of comparable size which benefit from policies undertaken by governments doing so with their citizens’ approval.
Derek Farmer, in the latter camp, resorts to cherry-picking figures to back his own agenda, completely ignoring the disparity between the standard of living in Scotland and our nearest counterparts.
Mr Farmer adds to his usual put down of Scotland as another Greece in the making by foolishly comparing our country to the former Yugoslav states.
He then compounds this with the erroneous assertion that an SNP win last September would have resulted in Scotland abandoning the pound in favour of the euro, which was never on the cards, in order to make anti-SNP jibes. Same old, same old.
Scottish independence has a broader support than the SNP, which Mr Farmer chooses to claim as nationalist, whatever that means in the 21st century.
As Mr Collins counters, it is in fact a civic movement focusing on the betterment of all in Scotland.
The self-proclaimed British Conservative nationalist, Mr Farmer obviously has little confidence in his fellow Scots.
This is at odds with Winston Churchill, who also compared Scotland to Greece.
“Of all the small nations of this earth, perhaps only the ancient Greeks surpass the Scots in their contribution to mankind.”
This is a statement of Churchill’s that is counter to Mr Farmer’s and the current Secretary of State for Scotland.
David Mundell insists that powers promised before last September will not now be forthcoming in order to protect Scots from themselves.
Such arrogant condescension may please fellow Tories seated alongside him but will cut no ice with a Scottish electorate he, the sole representative of his party in Scotland, chooses to blithely ignore.
Scots do indeed require protection.
The protection afforded by total control of our own assets, removed from Westminster’s dead hand, where from dangles our latest Secretary of State.
Ken Clark. 335 King Street, Broughty Ferry.
Immigrationthe solution?
Sir,- I thoroughly approve of plans that designate more land for housing.
Why is that? It is because Scottish families are changing their preferences from multi-generational dwellings into lots more individual homes for just one or two people.
Building more homes for smaller households of old and young mean we need more building space.
Allowing enough space for new homes means land prices need not shoot upwards, which, in my view, is a good thing.
Moreover, impending changes in EU farm policy will release a lot of land we presently use for subsidised agriculture.
That land could become derelict.
It is better to allow building on some of it.
There is another change we need to consider.
Birth rates in Perthshire and Kinross are a fifth lower than the numbers dying.
Despite living longer, our families are not producing enough children to maintain our working-age population.
Our council’s forecast relies on a steep increase of incomers to our city.
How will that population boom happen?
Here is a clue. During last year’s referendum, the then First Minister, Alex Salmond, promised that a breakaway
Scotland would be free of United Kingdom immigration laws.
He promised that lots of non-EU migrants would join us.
Is mass immigration the answer for Perth and Kinross?
Andrew Dundas. 34 Ross Avenue, Perth.