Sir – Your correspondent Garry Barnett of Guildtown (December 14) wishes to know the savings Perth and Kinross Council anticipates making from moving the council chamber from the fourth floor to the ground floor of 2 High Street, Perth.
This issue was debated thoroughly prior to any decision being taken to ensure we were not doing something which was unnecessary.
There are two principal reasons for moving the chamber.
Firstly it will make it much more accessible for the public, especially disabled people, who wish to attend council meetings. That will mainly mean the development management committee but there will be full council and other meetings as well.
The current chamber is on the top floor of the building and is not easy to get to.
Further, people may get lost in the building or, and happily this has not been a feature to date, they may have an ulterior motive for getting into the building.
If the chamber is on the ground floor it will improve accessibility and security.
Secondly, in terms of finance, we decided that if this move was added to the work already being done it would be much cheaper than doing it separately later.
Further, it will add to the flexibility of the building and help us to move staff out of three other buildings in Perth.
These are the Atrium, Blackfriars and Whitefriars.
The total annual saving on the three leases will be £444,000, so over two years the total cost of the work will be covered by the termination of the three leases.
It may be possible to move more staff into 2 High Street later given increased use of hot-desking and maximising the new open-plan floor design. If so, that would increase the saving on other leases.
Regarding Mr Barnett’s somewhat snide remark about it being good exercise for people to walk upstairs, the new arrangement will not alter this since many staff will have to come down to the ground floor to attend meetings and then, if they wish, climb the stairs to get back up to their offices.
Equally, as was the case in the past, they may use a lift.
Cllr Alan Grant. Perth and Kinross Council, The Atrium, 137 Glover Street, Perth.
Vanity project
Sir, – A local developer had an advertisement in a newspaper endeavouring to sell houses in an existing (and ever-growing) development in Scone.
These new houses are “only a stone’s throw from Scone town centre and 10 minutes from the bustling city of Perth”, the advertisement states.
Now I admit to being an incomer as I have only lived in Scone for 31 years or so, but I have, for all that time, believed Scone to be a village and it certainly does not have a town centre.
What is more misleading is the claim that it is 10 minutes from Perth.
The bus timetables (even with the benefit of a bus lane) state that the journey is about 15 minutes to the centre of Perth.
During school-term time the rush hour can result in a journey of over 30 minutes. Add a sprinkling of snow, for some obscure reason, and the journey regularly takes 50 minutes or more in my own experience.
As an aside, the only bustling in Perth seems to be around the bottom of the High Street where millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money is being spent on the council building, which, according to at least one councillor, indicates a commitment to Perth.
I, and many others, believe the council is only committed to its own vanity projects and the misplaced and undeserved egos of the power core of its councillors.
The conditions within the refurbished council building are no doubt designed for the comfort of councillors and senior management, conditions which managers and workers in the private sector can only dream of.
John D. Ridley. 94 Spoutwells Drive, Scone.
Come up with library options
Sir, – It has been an eye opener how the Fife Council decision around the libraries issue has been reported via both mainstream and social media. The political spinning has also been disappointing.
Not one councillor on the executive committee voted to keep the libraries open beyond one year: not one Labour, Independent but also not one SNP, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. There was unanimity for the decision to close the libraries.
There was also unanimity among the councillors that Fife Council should work with communities if and when those communities bring forward ideas for alternative forms of library provision.
The only difference among the councillors was in the timing of the closures.
The Labour and Independent councillors agreed to make the decision to close the libraries at the meeting in order to bring some certainty for the cultural trust board.
My understanding is that the Lib-Dems and the Conservatives wanted to delay the decision to enable local communities to work up alternative models.
The SNP voted to keep them open for one year only by using Fife Council balances, again to enable communities to work up alternative models.
My own view is the board of the cultural trust needed some certainty in order that they could plan for the future.
In two months’ time Fife Council will have to set a budget in the most challenging financial climate ever faced by councils in Scotland.
If any of the political groups wish to claim that they are in support of keeping open the libraries earmarked for closure then they will have to set out in their budget proposals a figure of £571,000 not from balances but from the revenue available to Fife Council.
Cllr Bryan Poole. 49 South Road, Cupar.
Letter was misrepresented
Sir, – The “deeply disturbing” letter is not that of Spencer Fildes (December 3) but rather the response to it by the Free Kirk moderator Rev David Robertson.
Mr Fildes’ letter simply advances arguments which aim to influence and persuade electors, a fundamental part of normal democratic debate.
Instead of participating in this debate, Mr Robertson inaccurately represents Mr Fildes’ letter as intimidating and something seeking to prevent, by illiberal and authoritarian means, holders of certain beliefs from attaining public office.
While Mr Robertson is correct to state that “in a liberal democracy politicians have felt free to express their opinions on moral positions”, Mr Fildes is fully entitled to draw attention to these convictions where politically relevant and to try to persuade voters which convictions should be promoted or not promoted by support at elections.
Gordon Dilworth. 20 Baledmund Road, Moulin, Pitlochry.
We can decide our future
Sir, – Underground coal gasification is being touted as safe by the greedy corporations scrabbling to make their next fast money.
Apparently drilling a couple of holes down to the coal seam, pumping air in one end, lighting the coal then extracting the hot gases at the other end sounds like a good idea.
What could possibly go wrong? Water table contamination? Landslips and earthquakes? Uncontrolled burning, for years on end? There has been a history of major problems anywhere in the world that UCG has been attempted.
All this certainly makes it sound too risky to attempt. So why not try it out in Scotland first?
Thankfully our Scottish Government has had the good sense to place a moratorium on the practice but where would we be without Holyrood?
The sooner we get full control of our affairs, the sooner we can make more of the right decisions.
Richard Clark. Craigton, Monikie.
Independence case destroyed
Sir, – Around 65,000 North Sea oil-related jobs are gone.
Even the SNP government accepts its referendum oil tax projections of £7.9 billion per annum were widely unrealistic. They are now forecast at a mere £2bn.
As petrol at supermarkets drops to under £1 a litre at the pumps, does anyone, including the SNP hierarchy, deep down still believe there’s a valid case for independence?
Martin Redfern. 4 Royal Circus, Edinburgh.
Women have no voice in Syria
Sir,- Allan MacDougall’s political hobby horse is out of its stable and galloping (December 10).
He seems to be saying that Nicola Sturgeon should now be seen as an alternative to the UK Foreign Office and pursue a separate independent agenda in Syria which, in this case, is to form a battalion of “female negotiators” to promote discussion to end the armed conflicts
between various power-hungry groups of armed fanatics and a government that is factionally biased.
No one disputes that, in the end, it will be dialogue that ends the conflict, but it is difficult to have a dialogue with heavily-armed obsessive and murderous groups, each pursuing its individual power-broking agenda.
This is why it is UK Government policy to disarm or remove as many murderous individuals as possible so that meaningful dialogue can begin.
I don’t think that either Ms Sturgeon or Mr MacDougall realise that in Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia, the chief behind-the-scenes combatants in this conflict, women play no part in politics or in many other elements of society.
Derek Farmer. Knightsward Farm, Anstruther.