Sir, Today I made a telephone call to the Royal Bank of Scotland.
I received numerous apologies for the delay in answering due to the high volume of calls.
I suppose the bank might have thought this could happen when they decided that calls to branches should all be transferred to their call centre in Edinburgh.
In the old days, before the bank inflicted this bright idea on its customers, calls were actually answered at the branch, with staff quite able to deal with questions from their well-known customers without the need to identify themselves, prove their existence, state their date of birth and name other existing direct debits. This alone obviously takes time to accomplish and without this burden customers might not need 15 minutes to deal with their question.
It is probable that the matter could be resolved in less than two minutes.
Before the bank explains that the change is to enable customers at the branch to receive quick and good service, I wonder why they reduced the number of cash points in our local branch from four to two.
My experience of this is that I required 15 minutes to lodge a cheque into my current account.
AA Bullions. 6 Glencairn Crescent, Leven.
‘Mischief’ must be stamped out
Sir, Nicola Sturgeon denies it; the French deny it.
Where did the Telegraph get this story of her preference for David Cameron? They claim to have seen a memorandum drawn up by the Westminster Civil Service on Nicola’s meeting with the French ambassador.
Where are the investigative journalists? Oh! It is the Easter weekend many will be taking time off. How convenient.
I smell a rat. This is the mischief of Westminster civil servants. This is not democracy, it’s misinformation designed to mislead and confuse.
This kind of behaviour is criminal. The authorities must identify this civil servant and have the person sacked. It is only by stamping down on such semi-official misinformation that we can protect our democracy and insure a safe outcome to the general election.
Brian Rattray. 124/2 Gylemuir Road, Edinburgh.
Full picture on Calliacher
Sir, The various comments about the North Calliacher windfarm gaining planning consent (Council counts costs of windfarm ruling, Friday April 3) do not give the full picture, and the decision is not necessarily a “slap in the face for local democracy”.
Aberfeldy Community Council, in whose area most of the turbines would be positioned, supported this particular application.
In our opinion the development was not a significant addition to what was already there, it would have little adverse impact on the upper Tay valley and it would bring some much needed work to the area during construction. Council planning officers took a similar view as, ultimately, did the Scottish Government reporter.
Dunkeld and Birnam Community Council and the John Muir Trust took a different view, as is their right, but they did not speak for everyone on this, and this needs to be recorded.
However, what are the councillors on the development management control committee for if it is not to form an opinion where conflicting views are expressed?
It seems perverse that they can then effectively be fined for expressing their own opinion on such things, unless their reasons for refusal were not valid and legal representation failed to pick up on this. Expressing a view that something constitutes over development is surely a valid reason, which is probably what most committee members did.
Victor Clements. Chairman, Aberfeldy Community Council.
Violation of democracy
Sir, Your report of the Calliacher windfarm ruling, based on one unelected Scottish Government official’s finding that would-be developers Messrs I & H Brown can claim heavy legal expenses from the council local taxpayer in Perthshire for trying to frustrate their attempt to extend futile ruination of the countryside, makes disgraceful, shocking reading for people concerned with preservation not only of our land and finances but also basic democracy.
The allegation of “undue influence” on councillors by local voters is a shameful negation of all concepts of local democracy.
The whole wind turbine scam, based on duped politicians’ faulty ideology, has led to huge damage, without appreciable benefit to energy production or the offsetting of climate change.
Long ago these politicos must have become aware of the complete failure of these policies, but have yet to show any honesty and patriotic and public spirit in recanting and abandoning today’s “renewables” as failed policies.
Your report highlights a dire consequence the shameful violation of democracy.
Dr Charles Wardrop. 111 Viewlands Road West, Perth.