Today’s letters to The Courier.
Sir, I was astounded to learn that Scottish local government minister Derek Mackay has frozen councillors’ pay for another year.
I was impressed by the argument, when our banks were in crisis, that restricting the remuneration of senior bankers in failing banks would lead to a diaspora of banking talent as all the best bankers left for higher paid jobs with only poor quality staff still in post.
This argument surely applies to local government and it would be regrettable were Mr Mackay’s freeze to lead to our councils degenerating into a morass of the unemployed and unemployable especially as strong and wise leadership will be required to steer councils through the difficult times ahead.
John Eoin Douglas.7 Spey Terrace,Edinburgh.
Would life be protected?
Sir, The recent Inspectorate of Constabulary report suggested that in the event of further riots in England, police officers could lawfully fire live ammunition where there is, in a split second judgment, deemed to be an ”imminent threat to life”.
Forgetting for a moment the hysterical, irrational and counter-productive lunacy which this proposal constitutes, we must first question whether life would be protected by it at all.
August’s riots in England were unjustifiable, lamentable outbreaks of disorder. But would giving the police the green light to fire live bullets at large crowds in public places increase anyone’s safety?
The police might feel safer, but would ordinary citizens?
Would ordinary citizens exercising their right to peaceful protest against unfair and undemocratic government policies like the demonstration against tuition fees last November feel any safer if, when a tiny minority gets out of hand, the police are authorised to fire live bullets into the melee?
As we watch protest movements demanding peace, civil rights and democracy grow and strengthen, it is not an exaggeration to say that if we are not calm and objective in our analysis of this year’s disorder, the UK is in danger of passing the Arab Spring nations going in the opposite direction. We can only hope that this proposal is ditched and ditched quickly.
David Kelly,Dunblane.
We need to hear from real experts
Sir, The debate on renewables versus fossil fuel rages on between scientists and between politicians espousing causes, while Scotland’s great asset our beautiful countryside disappears beneath growing armies of windmills.
We the general public are caught in the middle, many of us wondering why our leaders press on with prohibitively expensive windfarms and solar panels when so many scientific authorities oppose them. We are paying through the nose for present policies and shall pay the piper later if it all goes pear-shaped and we are plunged into darkness.
The opinions I should like to see are those of the engineers and experts who actually work in our power stations and on our national grid. What do they think of our prospects if our governments especially the Scottish Executive continue along their present path?
Do they think renewables will be able to supply enough power to keep our homes heated and lit, our transport running and our industries going for the foreseeable future or would they advise keeping and replacing our traditional power stations until renewables technology has advanced enough to supply all that is needed on its own?
Let’s hear from the people who should know what they are talking about. Has anybody actually asked them?
George K. McMillan.5 Mount Tabor Avenue,Perth.
Get involved: to have your say on these or any other topics, email your letter to letters@thecourier.co.uk or send to Letters Editor, The Courier, 80 Kingsway East, Dundee DD4 8SL.