Sir, On Friday I attended the meeting concerning the proposed closure of Arbroath Sheriff Court and listened very carefully to what was said by the politicians who spoke in what was supposedly a non-political meeting.
This position was soon abandoned and the proposed closure was used by the politicians and most of the speakers from the floor to berate the Scottish Government.
It was quite touching to hear the worries concerning social justice from the legal profession. The vast majority of 50 people present were solicitors who have offices in Arbroath or solicitors who use the Arbroath Courts.
These solicitors make a very good living, funded by legal aid, from the legal aid mill that has sprung up around Arbroath. The cost, funded to legal aid by the public purse, last year alone was an eye-watering £160m. Petty crime has been turned into an industry by the middle class.
One solicitor speaking at the meeting revealed he had received a grant from Angus Council to renovate his office which makes one wonder if this is proper use of our council tax payments?
The proposed closure of Arbroath Sheriff Court must only be the start of making the criminal justice system affordable. With the use of modern technology and a public defender system it is possible for the massive cost of legal aid and court time to be cut.
What was clear at the meeting was that the present system cannot carry on. The claim made by an Angus councillor that the criminal justice system must carry on unchanged because it is the only growth industry in Arbroath is Kafkaesque.
The adage that states that if you have one lawyer in town you have a poor man but if you have two lawyers in town you have two rich men is particularly apt in Angus.
Robert Alexander. Bothy Starforth, Carnoustie.
More power to Jenny’s elbow
Sir, One must wonder which part of Scottish history was missed out of Ken Clark’s otherwise cosmopolitan education (Letters, May 18).
One of the purposes of a sound education is to expand one’s knowledge not to confine it to tartan-hued, haggis-flavoured facts to the exclusion of world affairs.
This sort of nationalistic tosh now seems to have become the all too common language of the independence zealots, who use the Scottish political system as an anti-English diatribe, blind to all the benefits of “Britishness”.
What sort of independence is gained by breaking up the British Isles and allying ourselves with the EU, political home of our erstwhile enemies?
If the sad day of independence should ever arise (most unlikely) Mr Clark’s correspondence makes one wonder what sort of intolerence will be shown to those of us who would continue to legally work towards the reinstatement of British nationality.
More power to Jenny Hjul’s elbow.
James Davie. 33 Aberdour Place, Barnhill, Dundee.
Clarification on tagging ‘choice’
Sir, I am writing to clarify your report in Friday’s paper about electronic tagging Choice of prison or tagging raised. I want to make it absolutely clear that the Scottish Government has no plans to give offenders the right to choose a community sentence over a prison sentence.
The independence of the judiciary is a fundamental cornerstone to the Scottish criminal justice system and we attach great importance to judicial discretion in individual sentencing decisions.
We are looking at the future of electronic monitoring and have committed to issuing a public consultation on this by the summer. That consultation will look at best practice for the current radio frequency service as well as looking at the future use of electronic monitoring, such as GPS satellite tracking of offenders.
Kenny MacAskill MSP. Cabinet Secretary for Justice.
Reason why becomes clear
Sir, Cycle Law Scotland’s campaign to have motorists involved in an accident with a cyclist presumed guilty until proven innocent would have more credence if cyclists had to take training and sit tests as drivers do.
Motorists must sit and pass a theory and then a driving test before being let loose on the road, whereas cyclists just have to jump on a bike and do what they like, with no training whatsoever.
I wonder who’s most likely to cause an accident?
Of course, I’m sure there are masses of figures to prove that it’s always the driver’s fault, I’m sure if we tried really hard we could find just as many statistics to prove cyclists are at fault.
There are many idiotic drivers, just as there are many idiotic cyclists but law in this country works on the principle of proving guilt not innocence so why any organisation, driver training or otherwise, would think that the law should be changed to benefit one group, beggars belief, until you realise that the organisation pushing for change is a legal firm involved in compensation for injured cyclists.
John Strachan. 23 Beechwood Avenue, Glenrothes.
Euro entry?
Sir, Should Scotland gain independence from the UK, will we still be granted entry to the Eurovision Song Contest?
Colin Topping. 17 Mount Melville Crescent, Strathkinness.