Letter Writers' Guild

I've had the following letter in several papers over the past few days, and I feel there's not nearly enough public objection to the House of Lords, especially having read today of Lord "Fire-raiser" Watson raking in £338 A DAY in expenses, without even needing to produce receipts!!!!!

"Leaving reform of the House of Lords to MPs would be futile, as it would merely reinforce the iniquity of members making their own rules. The most effective for remedy for its many faults would be total abolition.

In earlier times, when populated by hereditary peers, the Upper House was distinct in nature from the Commons, but now, packed with placemen elevated freom below, it spends much of its time repeating Commons debate and bringing to this the same party prejudice.

The Upper Chamber's function is not to promulgate law, but to revise and amend proposals by MPs. This doesn't take a veritable army of peers, and a much more efficient arrangement would be a committee of no more than a dozen or so non-politicians of the standing of High Court judges.

Occasional meetings would suffice, and such an arrangement would save an enormous amount of money."

ADAM SMITH SCHOLARSHIP CASH (NOT printed in the Fife Free Press!)

Sir, - It was interesting to read in last weeks Fife Free Press that a well known India cricketer is providing financial scholarship support to Adam Smith College after an approach by PM Gordon Brown to encourage more India students to study in Scotland.
This financial encouragement, complete with laptop equipment, is certainly encouraging for the respective India students.
However, as the PM and Head of the College are obviously enthusiastic about this scheme, both here and in India, perhaps they can go a step further and provide equal financial interest several yards down the St. Brycedale Road from the College at the Kirkcaldy Job Centre.
The reason being it would be an incentive to several young job applicants to further their education as opposed to standing outside the Job Centre building without any noticeable encouragement for them.
We continually hear about politicians stating “equality for all” therefore they can show an example by providing equal consideration for local job centre youngsters similar to incentives being provided for students from India, after all the job centre youths are located only yards down the road.
Final comment being that perhaps the increasing subject of so called “diversity” should be extended to job seekers.
Harry Lawrie

The "Scottish Daily Express" printed my letter, but omitted the last para!

70% of the Europeans want a referendum

After the "Treason (sic) of Lisbon" we have Mr Millibrain (as Frederick Forsyth calls him!) absolutely refusing a referendum for the British people, even after a Daily Telegraph/YouGov survey, published late last year, said that 69 pct of Britons wanted a vote on the document.

Also "a substantial majority of voters in five large European Union countries want a referendum on the bloc's new reform treaty”, according to another poll published in December. The Financial Times/Harris survey showed that 70 % of respondents in Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Spain wanted a vote on the new treaty, with 20 % saying one was not necessary, with 10 % unsure.

Only Ireland now stands between sovereign nation status and a Europe with impending federal ambitions. The people of Ireland owe it to the peoples of all the countries in the EU to completely reject this treaty. To date they are the only country in the EU to be allowed a vote on it, not because of their benevolent politicians but because of the strength of their Constitution which demands it, but which will be swept aside if the EU constitution goes ahead. Isn’t it a disgrace that we have to rely on another country’s vote to stop this federal madness?

As former Czech President Vaclav Klaus said concerning the EU plans: "This is crossing the Rubicon, after which there will be no more sovereign states in Europe with fully-fledged governments and parliaments which represent legitimate interests of their citizens, but only one state will remain. Basic things will be decided by a remote 'federal government' in Brussels.” Can we let our political scoundrels get away with it?

Ian
(Jan.25/08)

Much as I appreciate the Fife Free Press for publishing my letter in the 3 Jan 06 issue the editor still took the time cut of my last sentence (in bold) so he didn't upset his pal GB, MP & PM

Dear Editor,
I would like to support Sam Keeting (PM not in touch FFP 27Dec 07) in highlighting the absence of our local MP when it comes to local surgeries. I too have been trying to get a local surgery appointment and been told by his constituency office that they don't know when he will next be attending and to watch the local papers for an announcement. He manages to get up here for photo opportunities when it suits him but the "listening" Prime Minister is ignoring the country as a whole and his constituents in particular. As most of the laws governing the UK now come from the EU and by his signing of the Lisbon "Reform" Treaty this will gradually become all laws, then he should have more time to "listen" to the voters.
I'm sure the voters of Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath will remember this arrogant treatment at the next election.

Peter Adams

Here's an example of how newpaper editors (as is their entitlement) can alter the thrust and lessen the intended effect of a letter writer's expression : these are two extracts from one of mine, and the excised parts are highlighted.

"Claims of discrimination against UK Muslims must be balanced against perceived preferential treatment in their favour.
A minor case : Muslim women were granted exclusive use of a public swimming bath. Would any Christian group be so accommodated?"

"Islam is a non-democratic movement, as is its right, and at national level is incompatible with western values. The British monarch used to be Defender of the (Christian) Faith, and in order to prevent civil unrest, the country should be officially designated either Christian or secular."

Any comments?

BobD

I'm often disappointed - and many a time puzzled - by material edited out of letters I get published. Here is an example from The Scotsman, 8th October 2007. Paragraph two was omitted, and I feel that this altered the tone of the original.

"Am I the only person outraged by the creeping Stalinisation of our pseudo democracy? I refer to reports on "healthy" school meals.

When I read of a staff member with the title of "school health commissioner", I had to check it wasn't "commissar."

Local authorities are entitled to decide school canteen menus, but responsibility for children's welfare rests with parents, and no-one else has the right to prescribe food for them - even lunch box contents are being stipulated. If, as Jane Anne Liston suggests, obese children might later sue for neglect, then parents and not councils should be the target.

I presume that reports of pupils being locked in at lunchtime are inaccurate. Does none of them go home for lunch, or to walk a pet dog or whatever?

You also report a school trying to stop children sharing sweets on birthdays. Having demonised chips (which in moderation are perfectly safe to eat every day) the palate police are trying to scare kids off Smarties.

A sense of balance would be appropriate. "

BobD

Re letter in "The Scotsman" (28 September 2007)

W.A.Findlay is not speaking "racist rubbish". He speaks about the dreadful reality which today threatens
the West with the onward march of militant Islam.
Consult Islamic history!
The forces of Islam overwhelmed Persian civilisation in 641 AD. Thereafter they proceeded to conquer
the Christian Middle East and North Africa.Europe itself was invaded and the Islamic Arabic and Berber
invaders were halted finally on the Loire in France. Had Europe not fought back at Lepanto and at the Gates
of Vienna in 1683 Europe would have fallen to the invading Islamic Ottomans.
Today the Islamic invasion of Europe is being conducted in demographic terms.
As the birthrate of Europeans declines the net reproductive rate of colonising Muslim women stands
at c. 4.2 here in the UK.
Let us give heed to the words of Col. Gaddafi, Libya's Islamic leader who not so long ago stated on
Al Jazeera TV, "There are signs Allah will grant Islam victory in Europe without swords, without guns,
without conquests. The 50 million Muslims in Europe will turn it into a Muslim continent in three decades".
For the sake of our children let us all face the reality which so many of us are now too effete or too cowardly
to countenance.

"Countryman"

Sanity prevails - the Ombudsman later reported that ALL respondents had replied in favour of continued use of "crusade."

It's time we fought back against this thought police state that's developng in Britain. As beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so offence is in the eye and ear of the receiver, NOT of the sender. In other words, no action or statement is intrinsically offensive, racist or otherwise derogatory unless it can be proved to have been made with that intention.

The Scotsman ombudsman asked for feedback on whether the Scotsman should stop using the word "crusade" (27 August). Of course not. If we continue to stop the use of words which offend this religion or that religion, then the English language would be very sparse indeed.

There would appear to be a veritable army of people (seemingly largely in the employ of local councils) who have nothing better to do that identify words, phrases etc. which they believe will offend Muslims or other "minorities" - only for them (and us) to find out that those allegedly offended are not - quite the opposite in most cases.

The Crusades were an important (and significant) era in European history - like the Holocaust and, indeed, the Caliphate (would Muslims want that word consigned to the dustbin?) - and this surely cannot be airbrushed from the records as if it never happened.

I, for one, would be extremely disappointed (even disgusted) if The Scotsman were to bow in the face of such a silly complaint by refraining from the use of the word "crusade".