Today’s letters to The Courier.
Non-objection is not the same as support
Sir,-In West Coast Energy’s attempt to rebut the Clatto Landscape Protection Group’s reasonable criticism of their environmental impact assessment, the project manager cites the non-objection of Scottish Natural Heritage as being crucially important.
What he doesn’t tell anyone is the strict limitations on what SNH can and cannot object to. Their remit is to protect nationally and internationally important landscape and visual resources as well as ecological interest. They admit there will be locally significant landscape and visual effects but nothing to harm national interests therefore no objection.
West Coast Energy have recently had an application in Perth and Kinross for five turbines near Muthill south of Crieff refused planning permission and there SNH did object. In that situation, according to the company, SNH got it badly wrong while at Clatto, according to the project manager, they got it right.
I think our landscape in east Fife is too important to too many people to be reduced to a formula. West Coast Energy have quite wrongly claimed the support of SNH when all they have got is a non-objection because it is not a landscape of national or international importance.
Clatto is an important feature in our landscape and it should stay so unadorned by seven 126 metres (413 ft) high wind turbines.
Graham Lang.Coaltown of Callange,Ceres.
Insurance for old age
Sir,-I write in response to statistics from the Register General which show that the number of people over 60 will grow by more than 50% in 20 years.
This is an unmanageable situation. Unless something drastic is done to support Scotland’s changing social demographic then we will be in real trouble within a generation.
This isn’t the time for Band Aid solutions which offer a temporary cover up of the problem.
Put the provision of care for older people on a long-term and sustainable footing, protecting those older people who are vulnerable and need support.
At the moment, Scotland is held up as an example for its “free personal care”. I think the name may be slightly misleading. There is free personal care to a point, but there is a significant shortfall between what is available through this scheme and how much it costs to go into a care home or receive care at home.
People are worried that their care costs will eat away at all of their savings and estate.
I think a scheme whereby people would pay an upfront “insurance” payment upon retirement to cover any care costs they may incur later in life is a great idea.
That way people know how much they can expect to pay and rest safe in the knowledge that they are protecting themselves, as well as their families’ inheritance.
It is now more important than ever that people plan for retirement.
We are struggling as it is and the future will look no brighter for our older generations if we don’t start to make changes now.
Lianne Lodge.Queen Street,Edinburgh.
Not impressed by more MEPs
Sir,-Jim McGugan’s claim (August 9) that in the event Scotland votes for independence the number of MEPs representing Scotland would increase to 13 from the current six has just given me yet another reason for voting against independence.
G. M. Lindsay.Whinfield Gardens,Kinross.
Reception issues in Forfar
Sir,-I sympathise with R. Alder of Dalgety Bay regarding poor television reception (August 8) but our reception of digital television and DAB radio is perfect, and that with our original TV aerial in use.
However, in a part of Forfar where FM radio reception of BBC stations is especially poor, my beef is with BBC Radio Scotland who persist in using the DAB frequency to transmit football, rugby, golf and even all-day cricket.
In fact the only ray of sense has come from Jim Spence who announced that a football commentary would be on medium wave and also on DAB.
John Crichton.6 Northampton Place,Forfar.
Rich patients would benefit
Sir.-I was horrified by recent comments made in the respected British Medical Journal by Dundee University Professor Sue Rabbitt Roff.
She strongly advocated the idea of healthy impoverished students being permitted to sell their kidneys to finance their university fees.
Professor Rabbitt Roff sits on the Regulation and Compliance Board of the Institute of Chartered Tayside Local Research Ethics Committee.
She is also on investigative committee and registration decision panels for the General Medical Council, which have recently been known to remove doctors from the medical register for purely ethical reasons.
Professor Roff suggests a figure of £28,000 per kidney a tempting incentive for a young person, or even young parents struggling to pay mortgages and household bills.
I assume this large sum would be paid by the recipient of the organs, meaning rich patients are more likely to benefit from this initiative.
Removal of a kidney is a major operation with all of the attendant risks, and the remaining kidney could fail in later life.
Professor Roff’s comments have so far received worldwide condemnation, including statements from students in Dundee, but this has reflected very badly on the reputation of Dundee University Medical School.
Jennifer Helen Allan.18 Grangehill Drive,Monifieth.
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.