Sir, – The true nature of St Andrews Environmental Protection Associaton’s approach to education, and the replacement Madras College in particular, is clear from their secretary’s response to Councillor Bryan Poole’s recent statements.
The arrogance of the remark that: “we are not at that stage in theprocess,” says theysee process to be more important thanprogress.
Readers might want to ask themselves why this unelected, unrepresentative group has the temerity to treat the public in this way?
Secondly, every response to Fife Council from STEPAL is couched in language that suggests this is a vendetta with that body and the replacement school is just a sideshow.
The failed challenge to Fife Council’s Local Plan and the allegation of a strategic alliance between the university and the council, demonstrates this view.
Challenging public bodies is clearly important but when it is more vendetta than scrutiny then the innocents get hurt and that is exactly what this group are doing to children and the reputation of St Andrews.
Colin Brown. 4 East Grange, St Andrews.
Laughing stock of Scotland
Sir, – It has become clear that STEPAL launched their appeal against the decision of Lord Doherty to reject their judicial review before even being able to tell their supporters what the grounds for that appeal would be.
Surely there can beno more obvioushallmark of a vexatious challenge.
They still cannot say what their grounds will be, even while they talk about “sporting chances” with a tin ear to how parents see this issue as anything but a game.
STEPAL’s grip on legal matters is shaky at best, judging from their secretary’s inability tounderstand that a judge’s opinion is a ruling.
While their legal credibility is in tatters, by delaying their actions at every stage, STEPAL have also lost any moral credibility in claiming they are acting to improve education.
Enough is enough. We implore STEPAL to do the right thing, call it a day and move on before St Andrews becomes the laughing stock of Scottish education rather than its ancient seat.
Luke Rendell, Lisa Leittch, Gail Sneddon and Chris Wallard on behalf of Parent Voice. 24 Shoolbraids, St Andrews.
Gravity of our electoral choice
Sir, – The people in Scotland have a heavy responsibility today.
Voting for the SNP will mean a return to thebitterness and divisions of the referendum.
It also means once again putting jobs,pensions, savings andnational security at risk.
Robert Finlay. 6 Greenmount Drive, Burntisland.
Labour should build bridges
Sir, – I am struck by Labour’s posturing that it will not “do a deal” with the SNP. Both parties share many policies.
If the argument is that the SNP’s constitutional position makes itpersona non grata at Westminster, the case could be put that being part of that establishment would make independence harder.
The Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP), the party Labour associate with in Northern Ireland, is in favour of Irish unification.
By saying that no deals will be done with the SNP, the Westminster parties are in effect saying that the votes of a large chunk of Scottish voters are illegitimate.
Alex Orr. 77 Leamington Terrace, Edinburgh.
Our children will pay SNP’s bills
Sir, – The SNP’s manifesto precludes austerity and proposes to close the gap between tax takings and expenditure byborrowing.
Presumably with total fiscal autonomy, the debt would be financed by Scottish bonds.
With a collapsed oil price, who would buy these? What would the interest be to attractborrowers?
Like the Westminster governments, the debt would be heaped on future generations.
We have only recently redeemed bonds issued during the First World War.
It is fine for Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond to do this as they have no children. What about the rest of us?
Ian Strachan. Golf Course Road, Blairgowrie.
MPs’ jackets on shoogly pegs
Sir, – In the closing weeks of the referendum campaign, the unionist parties explained that a no vote did not meanthe status quo wouldprevail.
A vow was made by their leaders that significant powers, close tofederalism, underscored by former Prime Minister Gordon Brown, would result within a tight timeframe.
Those same unionist parties refused to allow extra powers forScotland as an option on the ballot papers.
Thus, the no vote included not only staunch unionists,but those who weredesperate for extrapowers but feared the nonsense about losing the pound and theirpensions with it.
After the Smith Commission, it became apparent that the stranglehold of Westminster would continue unabated, so disillusioned voters flocked to the SNP in droves. It now looks like the biggest losers will be those Scottish Labour MPs who campaigned so vigorously for a no vote and whose jackets now hang on extremely shoogly pegs.
Joseph G Miller. 44 Gardeners Street, Dunfermline.
Time to clean up Westminster
Sir, – One of your recent correspondents castigated the SNP for wishing to lock the Tories out of government.
He calls this undemocratic.
He does not mention that the Liberals and the Tories locked Labour and the other parties out of government over the last five years.
The real undemocratic behaviour comes from Westminster eliteswho oppose sensibleproportional votingsystems and whocontinue to put barriers in the way of an elected second chamber.
And if you were looking for a reason to why such practice continues, look no further than recent research by Oxford Universityacademics that hasstatistically proven the relationship between donations to partiesand nominations for peerages.
Let us aspire toclean up Westminster democracy and let us hope that after votes are counted tonight and tomorrow morning, there are more voices in Westminster who will put principle before self interest.
Iain Anderson. 41 West End, St Monans.
Do not forget male voters
Sir, – Throughout this election campaign, I was very unimpressed with Nicola Sturgeon’sdesperate attempt towoo the female vote.
She launched the SNP’s “women’s pledge”, a firm commitment to gender equality and announced the desire to have a 50/50 genderbalance on all boards by 2020.
I believe that this is a completely unworkable pledge.
Applicants should be assessed on their skills and experience for the positions and not for political reasons.
Nicola Sturgeon is being paid a very high salary to represent the people of Scotland as a whole but since she came to power as First Minister she has concentrated on, and almost become obsessed with, women’s issues.
What about the other 50% of the population?
Men experienceinequality as well in the workplace although few women would admit that.
It seems inequality is a woman’s issue.
Nicola Sturgeon should be careful not to lose the male vote.
Gordon Kennedy. 117 Simpson Square, Perth.
A Liberal interpretation
Sir, – I was surprised at the strapline on page one (April 29) under the Glenrothes hustingspicture regarding the defection of one of our former members.
As the past convener of North East Fife Liberal Democrats, I decided to look into this.
Firstly, Anne Cunningham was never a spokesperson for the party although, as is her right, spoke as an individual at some local conferences.
I believe that it is some 20 years since she last paid a subscription and, therefore, became a lapsed member.
Harry Wills. Feus House, Kedlock Feus, By Cupar.
Shellfish threat to Angus
Sir, – Am I alone in my apprehension about the proclaimed benefits of the windfarms planned for off the Angus coast?
It has been suggested the construction phase and then ongoingmaintenance will create many jobs in the area.
I do hope that is the case and we experience economic benefits but I also fear the effect this industrialisation will have on the fishing industry andseabirds in Angus.
There are seriousconcerns that the windfarms will disrupt brood stocks of lobsters.
This has been thecase around otheroffshore windfarms where shellfish stocks have dropped sharply.
If this is repeated in Angus, the fishing industry will be set back years.
Robert Anderson. Kirkton, Arbroath.
Secularists’ fear of open debate
Sir, – Secularists seem to be afraid to have youngsters exposed to Christianity .
Atheism campaigners want religious observance removed from state schools, dislike faith schools, do not want Scripture Union meetings on school premises and were delighted that mention of God was removed from the Scout oath.
Why are atheists so dogmatic about only their world view being made known to children to the exclusion of afaith-based view of our existence?
Gus Logan. 2 York Road, North Berwick.
Enlightening experience
Sir, – I wish to express my thanks to yourcorrespondentsGrahame Miller and Howard Evans for enlightening us with their wisdomand depth of erudition.
Before reading their letters (May 1) how could I possibly have known that I am an intellectually cowardly, scientifically ignorant anddelusional person who has ceased to think?
Given their demonstrable ability to put forth informed andbalanced opinions, would they care to let me know how judgmental they think Christians are?
Ian Devereux. 48 Bingham Terrace, Dundee.