Readers’ letters

Crosstalk 13 5
Crosstalk 13 5
0
Have your say

Find out what our readers think of the stories making the Carluke and Lanark Gazette headlines

That’ll be right!

Dear Ed, – The Lanark Gazette (of February 30, 2013) carried two splendid business letters entitled ‘Join Our Fight’ and ‘No Benefit Here’.

The authors Susan Rutherford and Helen Jackson respectively, delivered a powerful and factual punch against a business practice, ‘Banks Renewables’ headed up by a Mr Anderson.

The data provided lacked hard and tested facts to compare with the above protests.

In fact the Glasgow phrase that perfectly exposes this wind farm development is “Aye Right”!

In general, wind farms have their part to play, but not at the expense of undermining settled farming practice and the rural way of life.

From my experience serving two farm communities in the Grampian Area, such are the backbone of Scottish Society.

Finally, some years ago I was travelling through Shotts area en route to Motherwell, at the time ‘wind farms’ were appearing.

The novelty was absorbing; so much so I stopped to talk with a farmer whose land sported a wind farm adjacent to his homestead.

From the moment the huge fan became operational he experienced head-stress.

I can only imagine a life undermined.

Mr Anderson stressed his project would bring an economic boost.

Again as reported above one can only imagine the concern generating among the community of Crawfordjohn.

So I appeal to our political trio in Lanark – Ed Archer, and the ladies (SNP, Labour respectively) – to alert our Scottish Government regarding (in my opinion) the breaching of Health and Safety parameters as outlined by the letters I have referred to above. – Yours etc.,

REV JAMES SEATH,

Wallace Court,

Lanark.

Heritage at risk?

Dear Ed, – It is with great sadness that I read of plans to build yet another house on the environs of what was one of our most precious (albeit virtually unmarked) historical sites in Scotland, namely, Lanark Castle.

While the temptations of short-term materialistic gain may be paramount in the minds of those seeking, once more, to use the distraction of an economic depression to sneak through a scheme of self-aggrandisement, the right of the nation and future generations to experience and conduct further excavations on this site must, surely, still be considered paramount.

I do not need to remind readers that the castle, which may pre-date the middle ages, was a centre of justice, the site of the royal parliament in the 13th century, the prison of Marion Braidfoot and a special focus of attention for Robert the Bruce. Its site is of virtually unsurpassed historical significance.

Please stop plundering our national heritage. – Yours etc.,

SUSAN KELLY SCOTT,

Friars Lane,

Lanark.

Union’s legacy

Dear Ed, – In 1633 Wandering Willie Lithgow, an eccentric Lanarkian explorer and writer, expressed in his eulogy on the Scottish coronation of the much hated Charles 1 the grievances against the Union of the Crowns.

In the years following “the end o’ an auld sang” nothing was different. Disquiet, dissatisfaction and disillusionment came from the economic, religious, legal and financial violations of the Treaty of Union, reflecting feelings in 1633.

The abolition of the Scottish Privy council in December 1707 meant that executive power passed to the British Privy Council in February 1708. This for George Baillie of Jerviswood and his fellow Squadrones was “rendering the Union complete”; to some an assault on Scottish national identity.

All this finally led to the introduction in 1713 of a bill to the House of Lords to dissolve the treaty.

Supported by Scots such as George Lockhart of Carnwath it was defeated by only four votes.

The publication of his Memoirs in 1714, which discredited those Scottish politicians involved in the enactment of the treaty, exacerbated the situation.

By 1715 the Act of Union had all but failed and the repercussions were to reverberate even up to the present.

The legacy is still felt today with the approach of the referendum. – Yours etc.,

MG YOUNG,

Biggar.

European rule?

Dear Ed, – In Talking Point, January 30, Ron refers to the conundrum of some folk calling for United Kingdom unity whilst at the same time seeking to leave the European Union.

A similar conundrum, perhaps even more confusing, exists within the Scottish Government.

On the one hand the Scottish National Party is seeking independence (from the UK) for Scotland while, on the other hand, it seemingly wishes to retain EU membership on the back of the agreement negotiated by the UK Government, believing that a new application should not be necessary.

Hardly independence for Scotland on two counts. Firstly, and to be truly independent of London, the SNP should surely wish to make an application for EU membership as an independent Scotland and agree its own terms.

Secondly, EU membership of itself means being ruled from Brussels. – Yours etc.

DR JOHN L YOUNG,

Lanark.

Bag the dog dirt

Dear Ed, – I write about the problem of dogs’ dirt. It is horrible for all us; even having to look at it is disgusting.

Consider the plight of my disabled charge who is confined to a wheelchair and has learning difficulties.

She is able to self propel her chair; this facilitates the rapid transfer of dogs’ dirt from the pavement to her hands.

From touch the parasite, bacteria and virus laden excrement is soon on her face. I read we touch our face 16 times an hour.

I know poop bags are supplied; is it possible to supply brains to dog owners? – Yours etc.,

NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED.