Sir, – I can’t be the only one wondering why the world’s best athletes compete in two separate games, the Olympic Games and the follow-on Paralympics.
The former is for those whose bodies are considered physically/medically 100% and the latter for those considered less than 100%. Yet they are all serious, talented, dedicated athletes.
I am not suggesting that an athlete with one leg should compete against an athlete with two, but why in this day and age of inclusion, integration, acceptance, and appreciation of difference can’t we have one Olympics which showcases the abilities of all athletes in one occasion?
Why shouldn’t Clare Balding take us from an interview with Chris Mears (gold medal winner) to one with Paul Blake (gold medal winner who has cerebral palsy) as part of the one Olympic event?
We already have understandable and acceptable segregation which recognises physical difference within the Olympics, such as weight divisions in boxing/weightlifting, and, of course, the most obvious one being that women and men don’t compete against each other. But they all still take part in the same sporting occasion as serious athletes.
In the effort to include “disabled athletes”, the International Olympic Committee is surely actively segregating wonderfully dedicated athletes on the basis of disability rather than ability by holding another, separate games for “the other” athletes.
We seem to have the “real” Olympics and then there’s the other one for those who aren’t able enough to compete in the “real” Olympics. Why can’t all athletes at the top of their sport compete at the same Olympic Games within their own categories of competition?
Graham Haddow.
23 Church Road,
Liff.
Not all children can be equal
Sir, – Nowadays there seems to be great efforts in educational circles to provide equal opportunity for children at almost every stage of education.
I understand this, and in some ways, admire the intention.
However, I believe that the outcome will be influenced more by the capacity of children to learn. They cannot all be equal, neither can teachers all be equal in their educational skills.
When I was 11 years old I sat an examination which was colloquially referred to as the “qually”.
Pupils entering high school were divided into classes based on their measured ability to learn.
I am not aware that this distinction marred our lives or caused any friction among friends.
AA Bullions.
6 Glencairn Crescent,
Leven.
Application is contrary to plan
Sir, – Your readers may wonder why Kinross-shire Civic Trust objected so strongly to Persimmon’s application for 300 houses at Lathro Farm between Kinross and Milnathort when the local development plan had stated an allocation of 260 for this site.
After all, this is only a 15% increase in the number of houses.
However, what your reports (September 14 and 15) failed to mention was that the development plan states that only 140 houses are to be built on this site prior to the year 2024, the lifetime of the current plan, with a further 120 after that.
Perth and Kinross Council has now granted permission for 300 houses at Lathro Farm within the life of the current plan, that is, more than double the stated allocation for this period.
Planning applications are supposed to be determined in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Eileen Thomas.
Secretary,
Kinross-shire Civic Trust,
50 Muirs,
Kinross.
Woeful state of Police Scotland
Sir, – Your report (September 16) highlighted a worrying aspect of the current position regarding the frontline strength, or rather lack of it, of Police Scotland.
If even half of what is reported about staffing levels is true, then the force is in a parlous state.
Morale cannot be anything other than very low considering the risks that the rank and file are facing as a direct consequence of the lack of frontline staff.
The damage caused by the lack of staff is being compounded by the fact that no officer seems to work a set beat anymore and they are enduring extremely poor conditions of service which are not designed to retain officers in the force.
Most worryingly of all, the Scottish Government seems determined to bury its head in the sand and persist with the line that all is well, a line repeated by the chief officers of the force.
This is despite the fact that anyone looking at the performance of the single force could only conclude that it is lamentable.
There can be no prospect of any improvement in morale and performance until the government and force executive acknowledge the fact that there is a major problem to be solved and put in train the real changes needed to bring about an improvement.
They could start by ending the parroting of fictional crime figures and the meaningless 1,000-plus officer figures when most of them seem to have disappeared from the frontline.
George Thomson.
44 Viewforth Place,
Pittenweem.
The freedom to shape our future
Sir, – There is nothing like the prospect of a second independence referendum to give birth to scaremongering from unionists like your correspondent Iain.G. Richmond (September 17).
It seems he thinks Scottish citizens are unaware that the revenues from North Sea oil go straight to the Treasury in London and not to the Scottish Government.
Advocates of independence have never claimed that going it alone would depend on oil income, only that it would be better used for the benefit of the Scottish people.
He highlighted the horrors of having to suffer the future influences of unelected governing bodies while currently living in a country which has an unelected head of state and second chamber of parliament.
The problem that exists for those for and against independence is the impossible task of predicting the future, simply because unexpected situations will arise to oblige you to think again and make your previous predictions even look stupid.
Thus, it could be argued that the main attraction of independence is the freedom to succeed or fail by your own choices and not by those thrust upon you by a dominant neighbour.
Allan. A. MacDougall.
37 Forth Park,
Bridge of Allan.
Folly of bid to control borders
Sir, – To the extent that coherency is detectable amidst Brexiteer xenophobia it is that “taking back control of our borders” is more important than remaining in the single market.
But simply hiving ourselves off will not give us back control because much of the problem derives not from the EU at all but from our obligations under international treaties.
In fact the largest component of UK immigration (nearly 20%) comes from Pakistan or India and derives from the widely recognised human right to “family reunion”.
And any realistic “taking back of control” would require a huge expansion in our army of enforcers to keep an eye on all the 40 million foreigners who enter Britain every year.
The only immigration affected by Brexit is the hugely beneficial free movement of workers and sacrificing our single-market trading rights to stop that is sheer lunacy.
Rev Dr John Cameron.
10 Howard Place,
St Andrews.