Saturday, October 10 2009

But how can a Westminster MP influence these policies? Any attempt to raise them in the House of Commons would be out of order, because they are a matter for the Scottish Parliament.

The Labour candidate was photographed beside Lindsay Roy MP, on how many occasions has he spoken in the House about the social care policies of Fife Council, which were so prominent in his campaign?

Labour can make an urgent response in the Scottish Parliament, to the policies it opposes so strenuously, by putting down a no-confidence motion in the minority SNP administration.

It is a fundamental principle of parliamentary democracy is that a government stays in office only if it has the confidence of Parliament. But also, by refraining from voting no confidence, Parliament is sustaining the government in office. In other words, Labour is helping to keep the SNP government in power and, therefore, has responsibility for the consequences.

But responsibility is no longer a word in Scottish Labour’s lexicon. It wants to exploit protest votes, while doing nothing effective to get redress.

It wants to fulminate about cuts, while not opposing the Government which decides Scotland’s share of tax revenues.

It wants to pretend that it is a helpless minority in the Scottish Parliament, when it has only one MSP fewer than the Government.

It wants to exclude the SNP from Westminster election debates, on the basis that they are about which party will form the next government, but it does not want to change an electoral system which assumes that electors are voting for a constituency representative, not a party.

And it wants to claim that a contingent of docile, whipped, Labour backbenchers at Westminster can defend Scotland’s interests, when experience shows that they can’t and won’t.

(Dr) Bob Purdie, Kirkcaldy.

After five months of waiting, the electorate of Glasgow North East are at last to be given the opportunity of electing an MP to Westminster. Their long period of non-representation will finally be over.

During the nine years Michael Martin was Speaker, the voters in Glasgow North East had no voice at Westminster to speak up for them on such important issues as Post Office closures, the illegal war in Iraq, Afghanistan and Trident.

Unfortunately, no sooner will the by-election be over, the votes counted, the posters taken down and the streets empty of the various party workers, than the General Election will be upon them and they will be back where they started.

The patient voters of Glasgow North East could be forgiven for believing that they have been most cynically used by the UK Government. But now with the spotlight upon them, this is their chance to speak and be heard, and it is to be hoped that they will make the most of it.

Ruth Marr, Stirling.

When Glasgow North East elects a new MP I had hoped we would get a fresh start, with a new MP who was going to do the right thing with their expenses.

That’s why I was appalled to see the SNP by-election candidate on TV fail to criticise Alex Salmond for his outrageous expenses claims. Don’t forget, Mr Salmond claimed for food when Westminster wasn’t even sitting and for hotel rooms at the same time we were paying for his flat.

Glasgow ratepayers deserve better, we need an MP who will do the right thing by the people of Glasgow rather than living in fear of his party boss in Edinburgh.

David McDuff, Glasgow.

What Glasgow needs is a fast river taxi link to the airport, not a railway line

ALAN M Morris is correct to point out that the proposed Glasgow Airport Rail Link would be inconvenient to many in the west of Scotland, and that tourists and visitors would be among the most likely passengers, (Letters, The Herald, October 9).

On the same page, John Swinney properly criticises Labour for not offering an alternative, but that charge could be laid at his own door. Has he, or any other politician, given serious consideration to the alternative of using Glasgow’s biggest (underused) asset, the River Clyde?

Numerous progressive cities worldwide now have fast river taxi services, so why not one between central Glasgow and the airport -- and other major towns on the Clyde and west coast?

Brisbane, for example, has its amazing CityCat river service of fast catamarans. These luxurious, sleek river taxis each carry in excess of 150 passengers. They travel at 32 mph and have a draft of less than one metre. The river taxis have become so popular there that an additional six have been purchased.

Using the rivers Clyde and Cart, just four CityCats could provide a 15-minute service between central Glasgow and the airport with a journey time similar to GARL.

The only obstacle might be the swing bridge on the stretch of road from Renfrew to Inchinnan, but that is solvable. At the airport, a shallow 400m channel from the Cart would take the river taxis directly into the terminal. The infrastructure and cost of building suitable fast river taxis for this service would be a fraction of GARL, and would give Glasgow a massive boost in prestige before the Commonwealth Games.

What better way to welcome those athletes, visitors and tourists to Glasgow? Stepping directly from a plane to a luxury boat and sailing past the famous old shipyards right into the heart of the city.

Jim Macgregor ,By Alloa.

In view of the recent stushie about the proposed Glasgow Airport Rail Link, I suggest it would be appropriate to reprint Kenny MacLaren’s letter that you published on April 20, “Glasgow Airport Rail Link is the wrong route, in the wrong place, for the wrong price”.

Bill Robertson, Bishopton.

The report from Audit Scotland on the funicular railway makes interesting reading (“Watchdog tells council to put funicular on steady course”, The Herald, October 8).

In 15 years, the same report with “trams” replacing “funicular railway” and “City of Edinburgh Council” replacing “Highland and Islands Enterprise” will also make interesting reading.

You could, no doubt, reprint your editorial with similarly appropriate changes (“Cairngorm funicular -- can HIE give facility a sustainable future?”, The Herald, October 8).

Sandy Gemmill, Edinburgh.

Britain must distance itself from US and its preoccupation to go to war

General Sir Richard Dannatt correctly, on two occasions, drew Gordon Brown’s attention both to the failure to provide our troops with adequate military equipment and to providing more troops.

However, the real question which needs to be answered is why Britain participated in the illegal Iraq war and now in the unwinnable Afghan conflict?

The Prime Minister, and most of the present cabinet along with the Conservatives, agreed to Tony Blair’s approval of US armed interventions. Now, our Prime Minister is making another major mistake by refusing to withdraw our troops from both areas of continuing conflict. Even General Dannatt, on his retirement, still appears to believe in Britain’s participation in these lost causes.

It is about time our governments realised that Britain is no longer a world power and must distance the country from America.

The US preoccupation with war is due to the belief that any skirmish is a threat to homeland security and, for this reason, it has hundreds of bases around the world.

Despite this, America has not won a real war victory (as opposed to those over small countries incapable of defending themselves) since 1945.

Much the same can be said of Britain, and yet look at the amount now being spent on armaments, the £70bn Trident update being a case in point.

Our resources must be put into building a just, equable and lasting society.

Ian FM Saint-Yves, Isle of Arran.

What’s the point in hiding from offensive words when history and literature have a different opinion?

I have often wondered why the words Harry Reid mentioned should really be offensive (“The prevalence of swearing is becoming par for the coarse”, The Herald, October 8).

The same words in Latin representing the same ideas are not offensive. Germaine Greer, speaking on TV, said she always used these words when teaching students. They knew exactly what these words meant and circumlocution was no help. Professor Greer could not be accused of a weak vocabulary and nor could DH Lawrence.

Stephen Leacock, economist and writer, wrote a short piece of advice on writing. A little was physical advice, such as the best writing being done straight from the elbow, but most was on the use of words. In a short dialogue he had two men railing at each other. One addressed the other as a lousy four asterisks, to be told he was worse; he was five asterisks and a question mark.

Leacock was making the point that representing a swear word by the initial letter and the appropriate number of asterisks was so transparent that it served no useful purpose. It is not permitted in court where the words must be spoken in full.

During the Second World War, I was stationed in a town in Bihar where there was a considerable British civilian presence. There was a quality Chinese shoemaker called Fook Chong. The British ladies never called him by name but said they had to call on John Chinaman, whose name in Roman letters was on a large sign above his shop.

As far as I know, Shakespeare did not use these words but punned on them in the English lesson, (Henry V Act III Sc IV). Shakespeare gave a word of advice, “‘Tis needful that the most immodest word be looked at and learned.” (Henry IV Part II, Act IV, Sc IV).

At the time when the Lady Chatterley novel was published, an MP entered the House flourishing a copy and asking whether it was a book members would give their daughters. Appropriately, AP Herbert answered in verse:

“She’s not an infant or an elf,

I let her choose her books herself,

But since you ask me, I would not,

Give her a racehorse or a yacht,

A billiard table or a course,

Of easy lectures on divorce.

But none of these should I describe,

As dangers to the British tribe.

Nor would I draw my child’s attention,

To certain bits I will not mention,

In Holy Writ, in Shakespeare’s plays,

Or other works of olden days.

I would not give her Law Reports,

(Oh dear! The things they say in courts).”

Chris Parton, Glasgow.

It’s time for police to act

Chief superintendent Anne McGuire refers to the atmosphere in Glasgow at the weekend as boisterous and refers to a state of mind where people are fearful and intimidated (The Herald, “Police chief urges older people to return to city centre at weekends”, October 9).

In doing so, she describes a set of circumstances whereby those participating are responsible for a good old-fashioned “breach of the peace”.

I do not know whether her statement is a precursor to a long-needed campaign to start addressing the very real fear that exists in the minds of reasonable Glaswegians of all ages regarding their safety in the city centre. If not, then it’s about time the police started to do something about the issue.

There is no realistic chance of less “boisterous” people flocking back into Glasgow in order to cure this problem for the police, it is up to the police to deal with it first and create an environment where sensible people would want to spend time.

I agree whole-heartedly that people come into town in order to socialise, and that it would be a huge deterrent to turning up in the town centre already drunk if offenders knew there was a very real threat that their night would be cut short by the police.

Glasgow’s economy requires not only a thriving late-night sector but a mid-evening one as well. In the absence of action from the police this continues to decline.

I call upon Superintendent McGuire to carry out her obligations and deal directly with the people who are “breaching the peace” and thereafter the city centre will cease to be a no-go area.

Maybe then, my children and I, and my members’ customers and their children, will be able to exercise our right to walk around at night without fear or intimidation.

David K Maguire, Chief Executive, Glasgow Restaurateurs’ Association.

Proud memories

It would be only fitting that the single surviving Union Jack from the Battle of Trafalgar should be returned to Scotland when it goes to auction on October 21, Trafalgar Day, in London.

The flag was flown from one of Nelson’s warship, HMS Spartiate, and presented to Fife-born Lieutenant James Clephan after the conflict.

Scotland’s contribution to the Battle of Trafalgar was indeed significant -- five of Nelson’s 27 captains of the fleet were Scots and almost one-third of the 17,000 crewmen hailed from Scottish towns and fishing villages.

In addition, Scotland’s industry contributed via timber products, with Baxter’s of Dundee making the Victory’s sails, and iron cannon and ropes coming from Falkirk.

Nelson’s doctor, William Beatty, and the woman who embalmed his body when he died, Mary Buick, were Scots.

And children as young as 10 were members of crews during the battle, the youngest being a cabin boy from Leith.

While Nelson famously said that “England expects that every man will do his duty”, it was said the Scots did not have to be told such a thing.

Alex Orr, Edinburgh.