The subjects up for discussion today are calls for free heroin for addicts, more on Forth Energy’s proposals for Dundee, mobile breast screening and Gordon Brown’s position on Trident.
Free heroin proposal an insult to taxpayers Sir,-The call for heroin to be prescribed to addicts (April 27) on the grounds of saving money must baffle law-abiding citizens.
The proposal would mean our taxes going to give drugs to criminals, while non-offending disabled people struggle to make ends meet.
The principle of supplying free to offenders substances which they commit crime to obtain also invites questions — why single out drug offenders to make taxpayers fund their habit?
If we extend the principle, the taxpayer should pay for children to be supplied to paedophiles, women to rapists and household goods to housebreakers, in order to “keep them out of prison” and “save money”.
I, like many millions of others, use a drug too, which I buy legally — it is called alcohol.
There is no call for us alcohol users (and the alcohol abusers among us) to be given free drink by the taxpayer.
I notice instead, that politicians are considering imposing a minimum price on all of us.
Perhaps if we all started stealing our drink instead of buying it, the government might consider giving it to us for nothing. Surely I am not the only reader provoked by this news into thinking the lunatics are taking over the asylum.
Alasdair Maclean.6 Clive Street,Dundee.
Consider biomass plant
Sir,-John Marshall stated (April 28) that the “eyesore, redundant harbour area” in Dundee should be “converted to shopping and entertainment use etc”.
This is an incredible stance to take given The Courier’s high-profile Let’s get Dundee Working jobs campaign.
It begs the question, what about the Nynas refinery and the many other jobs currently in the so-called “redundant harbour area”.
That is before we consider Dundee’s potential to attract other manufacturing jobs to what is, after all, a working port.
Dundee’s port has scored very highly in the National Renewable Infrastructure plan for potential investment in renewable manufacturing such as offshore wind turbines because it has the land available and the water depth.
This gives Dundee an advantage that many other ports do not have.
Mr Marshall seems to be confusing the waterfront development with the working port. We have invested millions in the waterfront with the aim of developing it into a quarter combining shopping, living and small business and entertainment use and, of course, the V&A will be the crown jewel.
We need both these developments for Dundee to flourish. Many of the big renewable companies have made clear their preference to locate in areas where they can source renewable energy for their manufacturing processes.
Forth Energy’s response has been to propose the two wind turbines in Stannergate and the biomass plant to be located in the port.
Having looked at the proposals, it seems that Forth Energy have not managed to prove the case for the need for the turbines in terms of energy generation requirements for the port and, therefore, we have been unable to support them.
However, on the biomass plant, we are much more open minded if the question of a sustainable supply of wood pellets (not sewage) can be resolved.
We have the most stringent health and safety legislation in the world, as well as strict environmental laws, and the idea that something dangerous would be given the go-ahead just does not hold water.
As a Broughty Ferry resident with a young family, I would never support anything that would be detrimental to anyone’s health.
Shona Robison MSP.Dundee East.
Accessible breast screening
Sir,-I am writing with regard to your article (April 28) relating to the use of a mobile breast screening unit in a supermarket car park.
The East of Scotland Screening Service screens approximately 18,000 women per year in Tayside and north-east Fife, and, as with all screening centres in the UK, it is not possible to fulfil this role on one static site (Ninewells).
Mobile units allow us to provide an efficient and convenient service for women in more rural areas and, in order to make this service as accessible as possible, it is necessary to locate these units in central locations with good public transport connections and parking facilities.
Supermarket car parks fulfil these criteria extremely well.
I note your reader’s concern regarding privacy but it is important to stress that, where possible, these mobile units are located to provide privacy and the highly trained radiography staff ensure that patients’ privacy and dignity are maintained at all times.
I am concerned that your article implies a stigma attached to women attending for routine breast screening.
All women in the UK are invited for mammography every three years from the age of 50 to 70, irrespective of their health.
Undergoing screening mammography is, therefore, not associated with illness but rather is designed to prevent it.
A woman should not be reluctant or embarrassed to attend for such an examination but rather she should be applauded for being seen to attend an examination which may save her life.
It is not my experience that women are reluctant to attend mobile screening units.
Douglas C. Brown.Clinical director and consultant breast surgeon.East of Scotland Breast Screening Service.
Damascene conversion?
Sir,-Hansard of 1984 informs us that Gordon Brown believed the Trident system to be “unacceptably expensive, economically wasteful and militarily unsound”.
Before I cast my vote, I would like to know when, precisely, did the Damascus Road incident occur and was it painful?
George B. Anderson.7 Elliothill Street,Dunfermline.