SIR, – I read in the Press and Journal (April 21) that Nepalese soldiers and police are authorised to shoot any protesters trying to climb Everest or get in the way of the torch on its way to the Olympics in China.
It is so unbelievable that all this warlike business is supposed to be for a sporting event. And it is pretty safe to say that China is in charge regardless of where in the world the torch might be.
The blame for all this should really be left at the door of the people who chose China as the place for the 2008 Olympics knowing how heavily that country comes down on anybody stepping out of line.
But what really annoys me is the fact that China has been allowed to control this whole torch ceremony in other countries. Are we all under Chinese control suddenly?
The real folk who need the attention are those in Tibet, which China likes to say is only a western province.
For so long the rest of the world has ignored their treatment by China, and the mass immigration into Tibet only tries to stifle Tibetan calls for help.
J. Reid, Ardnastaing, Strontian.
SIR, – I am writing to congratulate the far-sighted, wise individuals who approved the cutting down of hundreds of ancient trees at Pitfodels. These wonderful people have clearly acted after much consultation with local people and come to the public-spirited view that we don’t need natural beauty or to preserve irreplaceable woodlands; what we really need is a speedy, unaccountable slash-and-burn policy.
And who could argue with the logic? Build a bypass through pristine countryside demolishing everything in its path, including a perfectly good school, numerous homes and hundreds of trees; rebuild the school in an area of outstanding beauty after the chainsaws have had their fun tearing down even more ancient trees (without any consultation), thereby reducing Aberdeen to one massive construction site.
I feel I must praise our town planners for their Orc-like performance. Who needs trees, the birds and the bees when we can have the happy roar of the hungry bulldozer and the cheery high-pitch whine of the chainsaw to soothe and comfort us instead?
Lance Black,
Seafield Road,
Aberdeen.
SIR, – I was concerned to read your report (Press and Journal, April 23) that the police have voted for the right to take industrial action. I, and no doubt many other members of the public, find this very concerning. There should be an understanding prior to joining the police service that taking any form of industrial action cannot be acceptable.
While a majority of people recognise the police often have a challenging job, they also know that the police are comparatively well rewarded, not only enjoying good salaries and a career structure, but also effectively a job for life with one of the best pension schemes available.
A police career should usually be decided upon for vocational reasons, but the attractiveness of the financial benefits is confirmed by the fact that there is no recruitment problem. Prior to the 1980s, police pay was historically very low and, as a result, all forces struggled with recruitment and retention. Current members of the service might wish to reflect on these matters and realise that there is a limit to the amount of money that can be spent on policing, amounts that are at record levels.
Colin Campbell,
Hazel Avenue,
Culloden, Inverness.
SIR, – I write in response to your article, “Millionaire loses legal bid to keep ramblers out” (Press and Journal, April 24).
The landowner, Euan Snowie, losing his battle to have part of his 70-acre estate made exempt from the right to roam legislation has no doubt sparked even more uncertainty as to the interpretation of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 on deciphering how much surrounding land is sufficient to afford the persons living in that property reasonable privacy and undisturbed enjoyment of their home.
While the act does not provide a method for calculating how much land is reasonable for these purposes, it does state that the character and location of the property must be taken into consideration.
We saw these factors being taken into account, and these arguments ultimately winning the case for Ann Gloag, owner of Kinfauns Castle and the first landowner in Scotland to successfully challenge the right-to-roam legislation.
At the time of the Gloag judgment, there was much debate as to whether this would open the floodgates to other challenges by other land and estate owners. However, with the Snowie decision, it appears that this may not be the case.
It will be interesting to see whether Mr Snowie will appeal the decision, but this case has reinforced the position that, from now on, each case will be judged on its own merits.
Gillian Gibbons,
Solicitor, Pagan Osborne,
12 Catherine Street, Cupar.
SIR, – I agree with Ian A. Brown’s letter (Press and Journal, April 19) about the A9 from Dunkeld to Inverness. How dangerous that road is. It is also just as dangerous from Inverness to Latheron Wheel. That’s the A9 as well.
Also, the most dangerous road, as reported in the Press and Journal a few weeks ago, is the A99, as it is now called, from Latheron Wheel to Wick. It has more bends and patched-up surfaces than any other road in Scotland.
A. Muir,
Seaview Place,
Cullen.