Tuesday’s correspondents raise the issues of the proposed biomass plant in Dundee, a close-run contest between the Milibands and the Equality Act.
Leave judgment on biomass plant to experts Sir,-John J. Marshall’s opinion piece on the proposed biomass plant (September 29) appears to be little more than a rehash of his previous anti-biomass article of April 28.
It is the same regurgitation of claims and assertions of those who have always been vociferously opposed to the plant and the same attack on politicians who have dared not to automatically accept these as fact.
Back in April, John J. Marshall said Dundee’s elected members should make their views known and we did, in a response a week later, setting out why we should remain open-minded on the proposed biomass plant and the potential benefits it could bring for much-needed jobs and tackling climate change, if the health concerns and sustainability of supply question could be fully answered and assurances given.
As we pointed out then, Scotland has some of the most strict health and environmental protection legislation in the world and the idea that a plant which Mr Marshall now asserts would “pump toxic gases into the atmosphere” would ever be given the go-ahead is quite frankly beyond ridiculous.
If any of the increasingly wild accusations, assertions and claims have any basis in fact then no such licence would ever be granted.
However, what if these concerns are properly answered and SEPA, Scotland’s independent environmental protection agency, reports that such claims have no basis in fact. Would John J. Marshall ignore this and continue to insist he is right even in the face of evidence to the contrary?
The final verdict on the proposal will be made by the Scottish Government under the Electricity Act, with both Dundee City Council and SEPA being key statutory consultees in the process.
That decision will be based on impartial evidence by those qualified to provide it independent of any vested interests.
Stewart Hosie MP,Parliamentary Office,8 Old Glamis Road,Dundee.
Projects must be judged on merits
Sir,-One of your correspondents (October 1) complains about subsidy being given so that we can achieve 100% of our energy from renewables.
Whether you are Alex Salmond or an alien from outer space it is surely obvious that we have to achieve this situation and the sooner the better as all other forms of energy by their nature have a limited life.
The debate now should surely be about how we develop renewable energy and what locations are suitable for different types of production. For example, the biomass proposal for Dundee port does not sound like a good sustainable proposal apart from anything else, it involves importing the raw materials.
However, I’d support wind turbines in the port area it is a much more suitable location than on top of a mountain range.
Robert Potter,16R Brown Street,Dundee.
We don’t need this carbuncle
Sir,-The recent article in The Courier (September 29) by John J. Marshall was like music to my ears.
I have voted SNP for many years now but feel let down by those chosen to represent the council and therefore the people of Dundee. The biomass plant and turbines being mooted as a valuable addition to our city is laughable if it wasn’t so threatening.
The SNP element in the council are literally selling us down the river. We need a waterfront to be proud of, not the subject of ridicule.
If the councillors in question do not have the wherewithal to stand up for the city they represent and its people they should be thoroughly ashamed.
Avril Weryk,Dundee.
It was never in the bag for Ed
Sir,-I was amused by John Cameron’s absurd hyperbole when he stated that “the Labour Party allowed its union bagmen to anoint Red Ed Miliband” (Courier, September 30).
Perhaps he misunderstands the procedure? Because of the way the electoral college works, an individual trade unionist’s vote is worth approximately half an ordinary Labour Party member’s vote and approximately 1/800th of an MP’s/MEP’s vote.
While union leaders can make recommendations, individual trade unionists cast their vote in a secret ballot, with appropriate safeguards in place. Indeed over 80,000 trade union votes were cast in favour of David Miliband.
So there is no “bag” and nobody is in a position to “anoint”.
The truth is it was a very close election. Yes, it is true the trade union section tipped the balance, but it is worth bearing in mind David Miliband was not the first choice of the majority, either of party members or of MPs/MEPs.
In the final run-off in the MPs’/MEPs’ section David polled 140 to Ed’s 122. Had he gained just three more of Ed’s votes, he would now be leader.
It strikes me that if anyone is living in the past, it is not Ed Miliband. Rather, it is those such as John Cameron who use any excuse to trot out the same old anti-trade union vitriol.
Richard Sloan,267 Perth Road, Dundee.
Communism by any other name
Sir,-The disastrous Equality Act promoted by Harriet Harman has its roots in the perverse ideologies of the 1960s which have gradually poisoned our national life.
When anti-discrimination laws were first brought in they were meant to ensure people were treated equally. Ironically, they now do just the opposite.
Employers can now use “positive discrimination”. And public bodies will be duty bound “to reduce the inequalities of outcome resulting from socio-economic disadvantage” which is just Communism red in tooth and claw.
Dr John Cameron.10 Howard Place,St Andrews.
Get involved: to have your say on these or any other topics, email your letter to letters@thecourier.co.uk or send to Letters Editor, The Courier, 80 Kingsway East, Dundee DD4 8SL.