I am appalled that the Labour and Conservative groups at Holyrood should have joined in an unholy alliance to vote down the proposal to introduce minimum pricing for certain types of alcohol (“Minimum price for alcohol is sunk by MSPs”, The Herald, June 11).
Of course this would not be a complete solution to Scotland’s desperate problems of alcohol abuse and binge drinking, especially among the young, but it would at least be a step in the right direction. It is equally disgraceful that the LiberalDemocrats should have abstained, when this is actually one of the policies now advocated by their Westminster colleagues within the coalition government.
Richard Simpson, himself a doctor, argues that there is no evidence to prove that such action would be effective, but how will we ever know if we don’t try it? Other arguments for opposing minimum pricing are equally unconvincing. Almost all the medical, social and legal enforcement bodies in Scotland and the UK are in favour of the policy, and only those industries with obvious vested interests are opposed.
To most sensible Scots it looks as if yesterday’s vote at Holyrood had more to do with giving the SNP administration another bloody nose, rather than giving first priority to the national interests of the whole of Scotland.
If that is indeed the case then those MSPs responsible should be ashamed of themselves.
Iain A D Mann, Glasgow.
The childish opposition of the Tories, LibDems and Labour in Holyrood to alcohol minimum pricing shows that they are far more interested in point-scoring than the health of Scotland.
Who could honestly object to a measure that will raise the supermarket price of big bottles of white cider sold for £3 and bottles of industrial vodka sold for £7? A measure backed by doctors, nurses, the police, the pub trade and children’s welfare charities?
Claiming, as the Tories do, that banning below-cost selling would be an effective alternative is a red herring that will make barely any difference to the price of the cheapest alcohol and will only serve to punish small retailers who already find it hard to compete with the supermarkets.
With the LibDems at Westminster backing minimum pricing, it is particularly cowardly of their Holyrood corps to shy away from it. Meanwhile Labour and the Tories have been only too happy to swallow the bogus arguments against minimum pricing from drinks-industry lobby groups. They should hang their heads in shame.
James Tout, Edinburgh.
opposition MSPs have dealt Scotland a serious blow by rejecting the minimum pricing for alcohol, the central plank of the Alcohol Bill. Undoubtedly there are other factors to be addressed when dealing with Scotland’s alcohol and crime-related problems. Just what was the reason for the Tories and Labour to call for the deletion of the clause and for the LibDems to abstain?
The measure was backed by the police and a wide range of experts in the fields of medicine, sociology and justice; interestingly, even Malcolm Chisholm disagreed with his party.
What was the main reason for this social denial? There is the possibility that they were inexpertly advised, but it is when you look at the Central Belt, the heartland of Labour’s political power, that the answer to this query surfaces. Despite long spells of Labour governments at Westminster and Holyrood, it is home to many of the most deprived areas in Scotland, with high levels of unemployment, ill-health, alcoholism and its crime-related problems. Is it not likely that Labour, in supporting the “minimum pricing” of alcohol, would lose its core support in the central belt?
On the other hand, the LibDems and the Tories do not face this socio-political problem but only acted to stymie the SNP.
Ian F M Saint-Yves, Isle of Arran.
Historic buildings must be maintained
I READ with horror that yet another building of historical interest was under threat .
I am referring to the magnificent Alexander “Greek” Thomson Egyptian Halls in Union Street (“Greek is the word: £18m plan to transform derelict masterpiece into hotel”, The Herald, June 10).
Why are the owners allowed to let these buildings fall into derelict states where more often than not demolition is the only option ( an easy one for the developer, who then has then a blank canvas to begin from)?
I thought we were proud of our city and our heritage. Surely our council should be putting serious pressure on owners of these buildings to at least maintain them to a satisfactory level, rather than let them become derelict.
Thankfully this building is now being saved . As Neil Baxter pointed out, it is of significant importance as a European landmark, and has greater significance than any tacky stainless steel glass junk that seems to be the norm.
Wake up, Glasgow, before it is too late.
Ewan Duncan, Glasgow.
Parliament no longer provides a base for politicians with commercial experience
W A Fraser asks (Letters, June 11): Five Labour leadership candidates -- three Oxford-educated, two Cambridge-educated. Are they sure it’s for the Labour Party?
What the candidates lack in common is commercial experience. UK plc is an international trading enterprise which has to make its way in a competitive world. Parliament used to provide front and back benchers with a wide range of professional, technical, academic, commercial and voluntary organisation experience, albeit with rather too few women or people from a wide range of backgrounds.
Members were permitted to spend part or their time working and thereby remaining in touch with the real outside world. They were reluctant to heap unnecessary and non-competitive rules and regulations on our society of a kind not imposed on our competitors.
Now, in all political parties, male 40-ish grey-faced and grey-suited lookalike clones from Oxbridge, political researchers and local authority politics abound on the front benches, served by a cloned Civil Service also substantially without much knowledge or experience of the real world.
Parliament seems to have a fresh appetite for reform. We have a once in a lifetime opportunity to restore some of the stronger elements of former Parliaments in which spending some time outside the Commons on gainful employment was regarded as a strength rather than a target of righteous outrage.
Instead at present the country seems determined to reform such experience out of the upper house, no doubt with the result of having three, and not just two, sets of Oxbridge clones running the country.
Michael Hamilton, Kelso.
Can I suggest that if David and Ed Milliband both fail to win the Labour Party leadership that they start a Mike and Bernie Winters tribute act?
Michael Watson, Rutherglen.
I SEE that as predicted we are thinking again about free personal care and its cost. Pity its architects were not listening first time round.
Tuition fees next? In the end a popular policy never usurps the right one.
Sam Galbraith, Glasgow.
What kind of society are we we promoting when we deport Precious to Malawi?
Many of us used to be grateful for the humanitarian approach of High Court judges such as Mr Justice Collins, son of the late Canon John Collins, who acted as a check on some of the most ruthless policies of the Home Office under the last government in relation to those who sought asylum here.
It is therefore shocking to find a High Court judge not only confirming the deportation of a 10-year-old Malawian girl who has lived in Scotland most of her life, but stating that her very popularity and integration into our society counted against her staying (“Precious ruled too popular to stay in Scotland”, The Herald, June 11).
Mr Justice Symons is reported to have said that although Precious Mhango and her mother have become well liked and valued members of the Cranhill community and Precious has done well at school, it “would not be unduly harsh” to send her back to Malawi, a country she neither knows nor any of whose languages she speaks.
Her change of status and liability for deportation have been simply occasioned by the ending of her parents’ relationship -- a situation that in any civilised assessment would weigh against further trauma for a young girl.
The excuse that is often made by some politicians for the deportation of asylum seekers is that communities cannot absorb them. This is of course the same argument used by the BNP, and even by their warped standards it is patently absurd in the case of Precious Mhango.
The warm local support in Cranhill has been the bedrock on which so many of us have lobbied our representatives in this case. Sadly this has been ignored.
What kind of society are we promoting or permitting when on the eve of the World Cup in South Africa we treat people as moveable commodities reminiscent of apartheid South Africa, where the judges showed little mercy?
Let us hope and pray that good sense and humanity may prevail if and when the case goes to appeal.
Iain Whyte (Rev. Dr), 14 Carlingnose Point, North Queensferry, Fife.
Herald online initiative is a welcome boost
Well done, Herald and Times Group, on your initiative in assisting our school pupils’ need to better their reading skills (“Newspapers go online to help boost pupils’ literacy”, The Herald, June 10).
Students are accustomed to working online, and will welcome access to data which will support them in their quest to achieve their best performance in their final assessment for the Curriculum for Excellence.
It is especially pleasing to see that Gaelic has been given its place in the much-needed communication process.
It is remarkable how many young people absorb the language, and how their parents get absorbed. You are never too old...
Many of us of an older generation enjoy the feel of a good newspaper or book. Younger people have been brought up to be more used to a computer screen. That is not a problem, as long as we move with the times.
For Scottish students to realise their full potential, they must have the best tools. The Herald and Times group’s initiative will help them to finish the job.
Alasdair H. Macinnes, Edinburgh.
British Government needs to be wary of the US administration’s attacks on BP
Having just arrived in Oregon to stay with family, I have been watching news coverage on ABC, CBS and CNN and the only story being covered is the BP “Disaster in the Gulf”. I just hope the Ambassador in Washington is conveying to our Government and media the scale of the news coverage and the deep feelings of resentment being expressed within the White House, Congress, State Capitols and local communities along the Gulf. This is very much an inward-looking US Administration concentrating on the forthcoming mid-term elections. There is no mention of any special relationship or any acceptance that US companies like Haliburton and Transco were in any way culpable.
Ronald J Sandford, Fife.
President Obama’s response to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is well over the top (“BP faces demand for dividend suspension,” The Herald, June 11). The drilling operation for BP was being carried out by US companies who are also employed in oilfields off Scotland. Has our government taken any steps to verify that the same practices which led to the disaster are not being used over here?
Perhaps David Cameron should hold the US responsible for the banking crisis and claim compensation for UK firms who were tricked into buying unsustainable mortgages.
Maggie Jamieson, West Lothian.
Library I dozed in
At the risk of being told to “shoosh” by more bookish types, I wish to speak up about the concern expressed (Letters, June 10) that “only’” £14m has been earmarked for the University Library in St Andrews. I am not sure why it is felt that much more money needs to be spent on dusty academic tomes.
Preservation and maintenance are important but surely this can be done at modest expense. I am not particularly familiar with the internet, but I hear it is what today’s bright young minds are using and it is now the source of most current reading.
I would not go as far as to say the library could be put to better use, and indeed many of my happiest hours were spent dozing there, but feel St Andrews could do with even more coffee shops and eateries.
Dr David Carvel, BSc (Med Sci) St Andrews, Biggar.
Democracy demands discrete police forces
Recent announcements by various sections of our community that combining our separate police forces into fewer or even one would lead to greater efficiency and reduced cost to the taxpayer appear to have ignored the greatest reason why individual police forces need to be separate.
It is never a good idea in a democracy to have a single armed police force. Imagine the power that the head of this organisation would have.
Other democracies with armed police have local, county, and state police as separate organisations so that if the head of one decides to have an armed uprising there are others who can oppose them. What would happen if the head of a Scottish police force got together with the head of the army and decided to take over the country? Who could oppose them?
Many of your readers may think that such a scenario is impossible. I suggest they think again. Why put our safety in hock to the short term attraction of cost saving? After all there is a cost to democracy which we should be willing to pay.
Bill Jewson, Dunbartonshire.
