COUNCILLOR Kenny MacLaren (Letters, February 12) appears to have missed my point that council bureaucracies are now an unaffordable burden on local government that’s draining inadequate funds from sorely needed frontline services. Amalgamating local authority bureaucracies would accrue cost benefits from using shared technical resources.
While I did not make direct reference to reducing local accountability, two things do however come to mind.
READ MORE: Letters, February 12
First, we’re all supposed to be equal in our society. Perhaps Cllr MacLaren can explain why then, in his world of fragmented councils and so-called accountability, a taxi driver in East Lothian has the right to own and drive his own taxi, while in neighbouring Edinburgh the burghers deny that right to drivers who are reduced to the servitude of being forced to drive for someone else to their profit; usually at a considerable cost that fuels a higher than necessary fare tariff while restricting the availability of service for customers? How is this “equality” when those in East Lothian are clearly “more equal” than those in Edinburgh?
READ MORE: Does our country really need 32 local authorities?
Second, now Cllr MacLaren has raised the question of local accountability with his claim that’s what constituents want, supported by him citing Lesley Riddoch’s book Blossom, perhaps he can explain how this supposed public clamour for representation squares with the salient fact that he was elected with only 26% of first-preference votes, in which less than two-thirds of his electorate bothered to vote at all, and which correlates to his election by a measly 10% of the electorate in his ward – a fairly typical scenario not peculiar to Cllr MacLaren and hardly a clamour for public local accountability.
Local government as currently structured has clearly lost the faith of the electorate, and has seemingly descended to little more than a vehicle for career politicians who talk up the “need” for so-called local accountability, in reality the “gravy train” they’re hooked on.
It doesn’t matter whether one lives in Kirkwall or Kirkcaldy, citizens have the same requirements for council services from education to social care; indeed it’s unnecessary, wasteful and expensive to have 32 policy interpretations in order to deliver local needs services. We don’t need a two-bin waste collection service in one area and a four-bin service in another. There’s no need to have different traffic management criteria in each area; we’re all the same Jock Tamson’s bairns, with the same needs, driving on the same roads.
Shared bureaucracy benefitting from applied technology would reap huge rewards through economies of scale, which could be diverted to frontline services.
The 32-council structure that exists to run the budgets could be reformed into leaner truly local councils with a remit to represent local needs to the shared bureaucracy. And while Cllr MacLaren won’t like or agree with this, we don’t need the confusion of 12 councillors in a single super ward, and real democracy could be enhanced by restricting the tenure of each councillor to just two terms in office. People before politicians.
Jim Taylor
Edinburgh
HAVING read both articles by Matthew Lindsay in Tuesday’s edition (“It is simply an unfair system – the SFA must invest money” and “Morelos warned to mature of face even bigger bans in future), I find much to comment on.
READ MORE: It is quite simply an unfair system - there is a lack of investment from the SFA
Some months ago The National published my letter requesting English referees officiate at all senior-level matches in Scotland. Also, that VAR must become part of the football played in Scotland. All this because the standard of football in Scotland is a disgrace. A number of professionals in the game have since then agreed with me.
In both articles, Matthew tries to address the lack of investment by the SFA as a principal cause.
READ MORE: This legend got the s*** kicked out of him and scored – Morelos must do the same
The “investment” should be not only financial but also “supportive”, as there is no attempt by the SFA to protect today’s players such as Morelos. Willie Johnston was cited as a player who was forced to leave the Scottish game because referees (under the direct control of the SFA), did not protect skilful players then, and it continues right up to today.
The game in Scotland is slowly dying because skill – so much in demand by the supporters – is being kicked off the park by the player who lacks the necessary defensive skills. A defender who can only resort to kicking, injuring or with intent (as instructed by his manager) causing the opponent to be dismissed from the game.
It’s sad that viewers are denied the pleasure of watching the likes of Morelos play because of ineffective referees. Managers who instruct defenders to do all in their power to stop, at any cost, the skilful players like Morelos are all too present in the game. Just watch the post-match interview with the Aberdeen Manager who states Morelos “is unplayable”. He doesn’t have a defender to match the skills of Morelos. Result? Watch the game up to that point and the answer is staring you in the face.
I can only hope that some day I will see the likes of Messi, Morelos and all the other great football entertainers be allowed to display their skills secure in the knowledge that if they are dispossessed of the ball, it is by matching football skills, not just down to thuggery.
Time to change the game mentality and allow skill to flourish. If you don’t then watch the game die in front of your eyes.
Jim Todd
via email
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here